.NET Interop just works ... until it doesn't. Try that with some COM objects for hundreds of thousands of calls and run for the bar.

COM is fine, as is ATL (I wrote quite a set of things using that in the past), what isn't is that MS just changes direction every N years, leaving the underlying tech intact (COM is not going away, nor are basic NT calls) adding layer upon layer.

I do not want to take the full .NET SDK around for interfacing with COM.

Phil


On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:26 PM, CodeDmitry <dimamakhnin@gmail.com> wrote:
To be fair COM would be significantly simpler if it had a cleaner API.

It takes a lot longer to get "comfortable" with COM than most other COM-like
models just because of all the caps, all the absurd type layering(WTF IS AN
OLESTR!?!), terrible function names "Co* tm".

I can imagine the whole COM system being wrapped with Objective C, but even
the newest ATL and .NET do a great job wrapping it.

Without the horrible notations, it is a language agnostic model, so it CAN
be wrapped, it is just that it takes a great amount of skill to make sense
of it to actually wrap it. But in the end, Microsoft managed to wrap it with
C++/CLI nicely, and further abstract it with C#.



--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Can-Pharo-VM-be-altered-to-act-like-GNUStep-as-well-tp4918693p4918699.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.