Using a BSTR to Transport C++ Objects Across the DCOM Interface
The semantics of using a SAFEARRAY or a large set of COM properties is daunting to me. Since I don't need to make these complex objects available to VB or Java applications I can keep all the code in C++.
This approach takes advantage of the simple design of a BSTR which, as I understand it, is just a long pointer. What it points to is the address between a long int and a block of memory, actually the first byte of the memory block. The long int preceding the string memory contains the byte length of the memory block. Usually the memory block contains a null terminated array of 2 byte characters, but it can actually contain anything. Since COM/DCOM know how to marshall BSTRs across the network and process boundaries, anything that can be packed into a BSTR can be marshalled across.
The first step is to get the arbitrarily complex object packed into the BSTR. I used a CMemFile to receive the serialized object, then stuff the CMemFile into the BSTR.
The code looks like this:
BSTR CMyView::FetchObject(long lParam) // pseudo-server function
{
MyComplexClass *p_mCC; // a serializable class
BSTR bstrHoldThis;
CMemFile mfFile; // works just like a real
// file
CArchive ar((CFile*)&mfFile, CArchive::store);
// Create the complex object. I include this stub here to indicate
// that what is being passed is really an an object and not a pointer.
// It could be a megabyte or more in size.
p_mCC = new MyComplexObject(lParam);
// A small, simple object could have been created on the stack.That's
// not best place for a REALLY big object, although it
// guarantees that it will go away when the function returns.
// I generally put objects on the heap with 'new' and
// delete them after serialization.
// Serialize the object to the memory file
p_mCC->Serialize(ar);
// You need to flush the archive and file buffers
ar.Flush(); // flush the archive first
mfFile.Flush(); // then the file
// The step that creates the BSTR needs the length of the file
ULONG lArchiveLength = mfFile.GetLength();
// Stuff the archive into the BSTR with SysAllocStringByteLen()
// CMemFile.Detach() returns a pointer to the memory block of the file
// which is used to create the BSTR.
bstrHoldThis = SysAllocStringByteLen((const char*)mfFile.Detach(),
lArchiveLength);
// Free the object. The CMemFile will clean up after itself.
delete p_mCC;
// Return the BSTR result;
return bstrHoldThis; // send the whole thing into the aether
}
Now the caller needs to be able to unpack the BSTR and re-create the object. This is just the reverse of the steps above and I'd leave it as an exercise for the reader but I actually got it to work so here it is.
Void CMyView::OnButton1()
{
BSTR bstrA;
MyComplexClass mRC;
CMemFile mfFile;
// error checking omitted for clarity - but necessary
// go get the BSTR wrapped object from the pseudo-server
BstrA = FetchObject(m_lTestVal);
// here's the ugly part. I back into the length of the BSTR.
ULONG *p_lLength = (ULONG*) bstrA; // points at the byte AFTER the
// BSTR length
--p_lLength; // now it points at the length of the
// BSTR. Like Foster's - crude but
// effective.
// attach the memory part of the BSTR to the CMemFile memory block
mfFile.Attach((unsigned char*) bstrA, *p_lLength);
// now the object is in the memfile and it can be loaded
CArchive ar(&mfFile, CArchive::load);
mRC.Serialize(ar);
// The object is now fully instantiated on the stack.
// In this sample code it would be destroyed when this
// function returned so you'd really want to build it with 'new'
// on the heap and assign it to a member variable, or a
// Document data member.
// We still need to free the memory used by the BSTR and the
// CMemFile. They both point to the same memory. The CMemFile
// won't automatically free the memory that was attached when it
// is destroyed, so freeing the BSTR memory takes care of that for us.
SysFreeString(bstrA);
}
One could combine this method with others on a more general COM interface and agree to limit its use to MFC C++ clients (more non-portable ugliness). The challenge is to get all the serialization parts right for the array, maps, lists etc.

Comments
This will not really marshall
Posted by Legacy on 07/05/2001 12:00amOriginally posted by: Salim
If you passed for instance complex data such as pointers, etc... This would run quickly into trouble. The reason is that COM sees the data as a string. It will marshall it as a string (for instance if sent to a machine with a different byte arrangement).
This technique will work only on similar machines and/or for simple data types.
Reply
Fix for memory leak
Posted by Legacy on 05/11/2000 12:00amOriginally posted by: Dick Warg
ReplyUsing IStream
Posted by Legacy on 03/06/2000 12:00amOriginally posted by: Trevor Attema
ReplyJust another way
Posted by Legacy on 03/09/1999 12:00amOriginally posted by: Thomas Biedermann
Basically, I don't think that there is anything wrong with passing data via a BSTR. We are actually using this technique extensively, with a slight variation:
Instead of defining our own classes and methods, we decided to use XML as the underlying string-structure. We just made our server component capable of dumping its data into a XML-formatted string which can be put easily into any available XML-parser (we used msxml.dll). From then on, a client component can do anything with it without the need of direct string manipulation.
Actually, its possible to marshal a whole DOMDocument over COM, which imho will become definitely a standard way of transferring lots of data over COM boundaries.
ReplyAlternate solution to the problem
Posted by Legacy on 01/20/1999 12:00amOriginally posted by: Paresh Mistry
Instead of using a BSTR to transfer the contents of the CMemFile, I have used a SafeArray of VT_UI1 to achieve the same.
This method provides ease of programming at the expense of a little overhead of using safearrays to transfer data over the wire.
Another alternative would be to use Streams and Storages to transfer the CArchive files.
Reply