Re: [PATCH] EasyHack, fdo#46808, Adapt UNO services to new style, Parts 2 through 5

On 04/02/2012 04:15 PM, Michael Stahl wrote:
> i wonder, this XInitialization always seemed to be like some backward
> compatibility kludge, would it be possible to get rid of this for LO4
> and pass the arguments to the C++ ctor of the implementing class
> directly or at least a static factory method or something like that, or
> is there some reason why that wouldn't work?

Simplifying the way UNO service instances are created (there should be 
better ways than the current nested multi/single service factories, 
IMO), there should be no reason that XInitialization is still needed for 
it.  (Virtual methods is a red herring here, btw.)  Also, that would 
finally make it possible to have different constructors for a UNO 
service with similar parameter lists.

Stephan