Re: BridgeWorks

On 7/27/2024 6:00 PM, John Dallman wrote:

Sure does. As an Intel engineer said to me: "COM is not only a weird
meta-API designed to contort your code into forms where you'd have to
re-write from scratch to run it on anything else. It does that job fine,
but it also has positive features."

Classic joke: how can one rely on a technology build upon IUnknown.

Writing COM components was a /lot/ harder than consuming them. Microsoft
decided to replace it with .NET, over twenty years ago. They tried to
bring it back in WinRT, but that did not achieve significant acceptance
or market share, and is dead.

So true.
Using COM components in any language but C++ is super easy. Writing
COM components in C++ requires an expert. I don't know how it was
in VB6.
.NET does support COM, but using COM for pure .NET solutions does
not make much sense. Plain CLR & CTS provides a good replacement
for inproc COM. And various remoting/WCF provides a good replacement
for remote server COM.
Arne