MSDN Flash Poll: When was the last time you wrote code in COM?


Comments (9)

  1. Paul says:

    Still no real alternative to COM. It just works and is much quicker than components written in .NET and requires no dotfuscation etc. to prevent easy reverse engineering. Its a shame that there have been no new releases of the traditional VB language to replace VB6

  2. Adrian Parker says:

    To be honest, I’d rather not use COM, but if I write code in VB, it’s the only sensible way of calling it from an old legacy app written in Powerbuilder.

  3. David Beale says:

    I agree with Paul’s comments about there not being an upgrade to the traditional VB6 language. My "ideal" new VB6 language would have been an upgrade to visual studio with all the database and design tools, a new graphics module such as the .net gdi+. But I guess Microsoft did not do this as it would proabably have knocked .NET in the head! As to COM I had to integerate a .NET component which called a web-service, called from VB6 and had to use .NET COM Interop to make them all talk.

  4. Unfortunately, I still use COM for pipeline components in Commerce Server 2007, and this stands normally for the most troublesome part of any Commerce Server rollout and customisation.

  5. Martin Wills says:

    I’ve anwered "I have coded a little", but I’ve been able to achieve what I needed via .NET Interop facilities. So, I’ve left the old world of COM complexities using C++.

    Belatedly, I realise VB6 did a great job of shielding the programmer from these complexities.

    I can quite understand how VB6 programmers feel deserted by the move to .NET. The new thinking required must seem overwhelming for many.

    Whereas for C++ programmers moving to C# (like myself), it can feel like a great simplification and removal of clutter.

    But interestingly, I can see that many of the ‘ease-of-use’ features of .NET and Visual Studio have their origins in VB6.

  6. Jeremy says:

    COM – day in day out. From ASP (1600 pages) and from C++ (1m lines of source). Internal architecture & 3rd party components (ADO, MSXML, WinHTTP + dozens of others).

    COM isn’t legacy. It’s mature. It works. DLL hell is a falacy. We don’t have any problems. And, it doesn’t keep on changing like .NET.

  7. Alex Bailey says:

    I still design apps in VB6/DCOM/COM+ but I create all my type libraries externally in IDL.There’s nothing wrong with COM and it works fine in an enterprise environment.

    If MS hadn’t pulled the plug in it, I would be happy to go on using it for years and its a pity the petition to Microsoft to extend the lifeline of VB6 fell on deaf ears.

    I’m far too busy to learn a whole new architecture and VS.Net still feels clunky to me even in its 2008 form.

  8. Brian says:

    Have to aggree with many of the comments about VB6 and COM it’s still MUCH quicker to fire up notepad and create classic ASP,VBA etc than to wait hours for VS 200X to start . Would suggest that most developers do, soemwhat pervesely, object to change but welcome it when it helps VS 200X  just seems a retrogarde step </rant> 🙂