.Net to COM basics question

[Frank Hofstaedter]

Hi -

I'm trying to understand some fundamental .Net/COM interoperability issues
and would appreciate anyone shedding some light.

What is necessary to early bind to COM classes? Is it sufficient to use the
references dialog in VS.Net to point to the COM typelib like we do in VB6?
Does an assembly have to be generated off of the existing typelib to
successfully early bind?

What is necessary to late bind to a COM class? Is there the equivalent of
CreateObject or does one accomplish this by wading through the
System.Reflection set of classes?

Finally, does Microsoft maintain a publically accessible list of known
"issues" with the Beta so I don't bang my head against the wall trying to
figure what's wrong with things already known to be bugs?

[Patrick Steele]

In article <3a8412a9$1@news.devx.com>, fhofstaedter@hotmail.com says...
> Hi -
>
> I'm trying to understand some fundamental .Net/COM interoperability issues
> and would appreciate anyone shedding some light.
>
> What is necessary to early bind to COM classes? Is it sufficient to use the
> references dialog in VS.Net to point to the COM typelib like we do in VB6?
> Does an assembly have to be generated off of the existing typelib to
> successfully early bind?

Use the tlbimp utility to create a wrapper around your COM objects. This
wrapper is a regular .NET assembly that you add as a reference. Use the
"Imports" statement (or just fully qualify the object name) when creating
a variable to reference the object.

> What is necessary to late bind to a COM class? Is there the equivalent of
> CreateObject or does one accomplish this by wading through the
> System.Reflection set of classes?

Basically, the same thing, except the variable type should be declared
"As Object".

> Finally, does Microsoft maintain a publically accessible list of known
> "issues" with the Beta so I don't bang my head against the wall trying to
> figure what's wrong with things already known to be bugs?

Not that I know. This group is a good place to bounce ideas off people.
Also, the DOTNET list at DevelopMentor is a good one:

http://discuss.develop.com

--
Patrick Steele
(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
Lead Software Architect
Image Process Design

[Frank Hofstaedter]

Thanks for the info Patrick - that helps clarify things. Unfortunately, I
still can't get my test to work. I am replicating a VB6 utility I wrote in
VB.net that utilized SQLDMO. The app simply terminates upon instantiation
of the SQLServer object - no exceptions, no nuthin', just terminates the
execution of the app and returns to design mode. I thought it might have
something to do with referencing it as a dotNet assembly vs. referencing it
as a COM object. Both ways establish references and show up in the object
browser just fine and both ways die at the same spot. Perhaps the Beta just
isn't ready to talk to SQLDMO yet! Thanks.

[Patrick Steele]

In article <3a841df8$1@news.devx.com>, fhofstaedter@hotmail.com says...
> Thanks for the info Patrick - that helps clarify things. Unfortunately, I
> still can't get my test to work. I am replicating a VB6 utility I wrote in
> VB.net that utilized SQLDMO. The app simply terminates upon instantiation
> of the SQLServer object - no exceptions, no nuthin', just terminates the
> execution of the app and returns to design mode. I thought it might have
> something to do with referencing it as a dotNet assembly vs. referencing it
> as a COM object. Both ways establish references and show up in the object
> browser just fine and both ways die at the same spot. Perhaps the Beta just
> isn't ready to talk to SQLDMO yet! Thanks.

Make sure you define the object type properly. Some objects need to be
defined as the interface to a class -- not the class itself. See:

http://discuss.develop.com/archives/...DOTNET&P=R4065

For more information.

--
Patrick Steele
(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
Lead Software Architect
Image Process Design

[Frank Hofstaedter]

Apparently not only did I have to define the variable as the interface to
the class, but I had to have the correct class instantiated as well. This
is the code that now works:
Dim objSQLServer As SQLDMO._SQLServer


objSQLServer = New SQLDMO.__SQLServer()

With objSQLServer

..Connect("00LP154")

End With

objSQLServer = Nothing


End Sub

Thanks a lot! At the risk of revealing even more ignorance, other questions
arise: Where the %^&#@ did the __SQLServer class come from? VB6 doesn't
see it and is perfectly happy using the SQLServer class. Is this some kind
of on-the fly assembly generation creating new class definitions in vs.net?
And regarding your statement: "Some objects need to be defined as the
interface to a class -- not the class itself" If an interface and base
class expose the same method signatures, how/when/why would I know that I
have to define to the interface rather than the class? Thanks!

"Patrick Steele" <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote in message
news:MPG.14ede9c42289a9e89896ab@news.devx.com...
>
> Make sure you define the object type properly. Some objects need to be
> defined as the interface to a class -- not the class itself. See:
>
> http://discuss.develop.com/archives/...DOTNET&P=R4065
>
> For more information.
>
> --
> Patrick Steele
> (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
> Lead Software Architect
> Image Process Design

[Patrick Steele]

In article <3a842e71$1@news.devx.com>, fhofstaedter@hotmail.com says...
>
> Thanks a lot! At the risk of revealing even more ignorance, other questions
> arise: Where the %^&#@ did the __SQLServer class come from? VB6 doesn't
> see it and is perfectly happy using the SQLServer class. Is this some kind
> of on-the fly assembly generation creating new class definitions in vs.net?

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. It may actually be that VB6 used
the __SQLServer class in the background -- it just hid you from the
details. Again -- this is a guess.

> And regarding your statement: "Some objects need to be defined as the
> interface to a class -- not the class itself" If an interface and base
> class expose the same method signatures, how/when/why would I know that I
> have to define to the interface rather than the class? Thanks!

Check the signature of the method you're calling. I was doing some work
with importing the Rational Rose COM API and noticed places where
functions actually returned "IClasses" instead of "Classes" -- which I
used to use in VB6. The object browser showed the function as returning
an "IClasses" and not a "Classes" object.

Another guess -- it's more stuff VB6 did in the background...

--
Patrick Steele
(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
Lead Software Architect
Image Process Design