Manually project IVector and IVectorView

[halildurmus]

Currently, the only supported types are String and WinRT types such as IHostName.

I found the types that IVector and IVectorView support in here.

From the link above, the types that IVector and IVectorView support are WinRT types, primitive types like String, int, bool etc., and also some structs like GUID, Point, Size, DateTime, Uri etc.

I looked into the WinMD files using ILSpy and the majority of the APIs returns IVector<String> or IVector<T extends IInspectable>. This is also the case for IVectorView. That's why I didn't add support for the remaining types and some of them were structs like GUID, Point which I don't know how to project them. We can add support for them in the future.

While adding support for generic types, I had to find a way to create constructors from generic T types. In the beginning, I was storing the constructor tear-off mappings for T types inside a Map like this:

  static const map = <Type, IInspectable Function(Pointer<COMObject>)>{
    IHostName: IHostName.new,
    IStorageFile: IStorageFile.new,
    ...
  };

After learning the number of types that IVectorView supports -- which is more than 300, I abandoned this plan and added a creator parameter to constructors of IVector and IVectorView.

This parameter is only required for WinRT types like IVector<IHostName> and as I assume we will convert methods or properties that return Pointer<COMObject> to their respective types such as IVector or IVectorView(we're gonna expose this as a List, but first we're gonna turn this into an IVectorView in the generated code), the consumers won't have to deal with this which is great.

I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

EDIT: I just figured out how to use IIterable and IIterator. I won't include them in this since this PR has grown quite a bit already.

[Sunbreak]

Good job. #259 depend on this!

[timsneath]

Been playing around with this, with a couple of suggestions here: https://github.com/halildurmus/win32/pull/1

[timsneath]

My goodness: this is impressive. You've taken this a whole level further.

I'll review the PR, but it'll take me a little while given its length.

Would you mind signing a CLA, by the way? https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-individual

[halildurmus]

My goodness: this is impressive. You've taken this a whole level further.

I'll review the PR, but it'll take me a little while given its length.

Thanks.

Would you mind signing a CLA, by the way? https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-individual

I signed this last year.

[timsneath]

I've made a few relatively minor comments; if you can address these, I think we'll be in good shape to merge and then iterate further.

[halildurmus]

Hey @timsneath, this test is flaky:
https://github.com/timsneath/win32/blob/cc9933f2216b5da247227a050aa3e2f21421abaf/test/bstr_test.dart#L23-L26

If you run this test several times on your computer, you will notice that it sometimes fails.

[timsneath]

Are we good to merge, do you think? (Aside from my own test flake...)

[halildurmus]

Yes, I think we're good.

[timsneath]

Thank you for this amazing pull request, Halil! This is awesome 🥳