ActiveX DLL's vs. Classes


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: ActiveX DLL's vs. Classes

  1. #1
    jon Guest

    ActiveX DLL's vs. Classes


    It's common practice in my shop to build ActiveX DLL's which contain frequently
    used code (INI File access, etc.). I've been taught that it was better to
    use common classes instead - easier to debug, simpler installation, etc.
    Is there a reason to use DLL's instead? The only possible reason I can
    think of is possible MTS - any others?
    Share on Google+

  2. #2
    Deborah Kurata Guest

    Re: ActiveX DLL's vs. Classes

    Hi Jon -

    I am a little unsure about your question. We normally recommend using common
    classes and compiling them into an ActiveX DLL!

    Deborah

    jon wrote in message <38ff27c1$1@news.devx.com>...
    >
    >It's common practice in my shop to build ActiveX DLL's which contain

    frequently
    >used code (INI File access, etc.). I've been taught that it was better to
    >use common classes instead - easier to debug, simpler installation, etc.
    > Is there a reason to use DLL's instead? The only possible reason I can
    >think of is possible MTS - any others?



    Share on Google+

  3. #3
    jon Guest

    Re: ActiveX DLL's vs. Classes


    Thanks for the quick response. Here's what I mean: If you have common code
    that is used in multiple projects (mostly WebClasses), would you want to
    use ActiveX DLL's to encapsulate this common code, or would you want to use
    classes?

    My preference is to have a Common folder in VSS, with a data access class,
    a file handling class, an error handling class, a membership class, etc.
    These classes are then shared into new projects.

    Another option is to create an ADO wrapper DLL, a file handling DLL, etc.,
    and reference these in new projects.

    What's your preference and why?

    "Deborah Kurata" <deborahk@insteptech.com> wrote:
    >Hi Jon -
    >
    >I am a little unsure about your question. We normally recommend using common
    >classes and compiling them into an ActiveX DLL!
    >
    >Deborah
    >
    >jon wrote in message <38ff27c1$1@news.devx.com>...
    >>
    >>It's common practice in my shop to build ActiveX DLL's which contain

    >frequently
    >>used code (INI File access, etc.). I've been taught that it was better

    to
    >>use common classes instead - easier to debug, simpler installation, etc.
    >> Is there a reason to use DLL's instead? The only possible reason I can
    >>think of is possible MTS - any others?

    >
    >


    Share on Google+

  4. #4
    Deborah Kurata Guest

    Re: ActiveX DLL's vs. Classes

    I prefer to have them compiled. That way that cannot be accidentally
    changed. That allows allows correcting bugs and deploying updates to the
    component without recompiling any of the applications that use it.

    Good luck!
    Deborah

    jon wrote in message <38ff49c2$1@news.devx.com>...
    >
    >Thanks for the quick response. Here's what I mean: If you have common

    code
    >that is used in multiple projects (mostly WebClasses), would you want to
    >use ActiveX DLL's to encapsulate this common code, or would you want to use
    >classes?
    >
    >My preference is to have a Common folder in VSS, with a data access class,
    >a file handling class, an error handling class, a membership class, etc.
    > These classes are then shared into new projects.
    >
    >Another option is to create an ADO wrapper DLL, a file handling DLL, etc.,
    >and reference these in new projects.
    >
    >What's your preference and why?
    >
    >"Deborah Kurata" <deborahk@insteptech.com> wrote:
    >>Hi Jon -
    >>
    >>I am a little unsure about your question. We normally recommend using

    common
    >>classes and compiling them into an ActiveX DLL!
    >>
    >>Deborah
    >>
    >>jon wrote in message <38ff27c1$1@news.devx.com>...
    >>>
    >>>It's common practice in my shop to build ActiveX DLL's which contain

    >>frequently
    >>>used code (INI File access, etc.). I've been taught that it was better

    >to
    >>>use common classes instead - easier to debug, simpler installation, etc.
    >>> Is there a reason to use DLL's instead? The only possible reason I can
    >>>think of is possible MTS - any others?

    >>
    >>

    >



    Share on Google+

Similar Threads

  1. VB.Net and ActiveX DLLs
    By Abhijeet Landge in forum .NET
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-16-2001, 09:48 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-04-2001, 10:56 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-03-2001, 02:19 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-03-2001, 12:57 PM
  5. Passing VB7 classes as arguments to VC7 DLLs.
    By Patrick Ireland in forum .NET
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-02-2001, 10:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center