feat: Also return the interface name

[larseggert]

No description provided.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 89.18919% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 93.24%. Comparing base (655a937) to head (6084033).
Report is 24 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/lib.rs	89.18%	4 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #11      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.05%   93.24%   +0.18%     
==========================================
  Files           1        1              
  Lines         144      222      +78     
==========================================
+ Hits          134      207      +73     
- Misses         10       15       +5     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[larseggert]

@djc so how do I now get updated Windows bindings when I need to add support for a new function? I don't have access to a Windows machine to run bindgen.

[djc]

@djc so how do I now get updated Windows bindings when I need to add support for a new function? I don't have access to a Windows machine to run bindgen.

I did it via CI, which will print the newly generated bindings when the comparison fails -- but you have to get the integration test to run, which only happens when the library compiles. Might be an option to put the codegen in a separate crate to make that easier...

[larseggert]

I did it via CI, which will print the newly generated bindings when the comparison fails -- but you have to get the integration test to run, which only happens when the library compiles. Might be an option to put the codegen in a separate crate to make that easier...

Hm. This is getting complex fast. I'm tempted to revert #14 and just go back to what we had before...

[djc]

If you just make a separate branch/PR that adds the newly required symbols only in the codegen test, that should make things easier.

[larseggert]

but you have to get the integration test to run

Could we run bindgen in build.rs? IIRC @martinthomson suggested something similar.

[djc]

but you have to get the integration test to run

Could we run bindgen in build.rs? IIRC @martinthomson suggested something similar.

Like the previous approach, that optimizes for the maintainers at the expense of every downstream build ever, which doesn't seem like a good trade-off to me.

[larseggert]

The "separate PR" thing worked, thanks!

[mxinden]

Thanks!

Definitely in favor of returning a UTF-8 String over a hash.