what is so different about CLR

Hi Neo,

to make a long story (more than 3000 pages ;-) short
1. CLR is a run-time which provide
- a "kind" of Virtual Machine, it means that it interpret an intermediate
code called IL (Intermediate Language).
The main advantage is more meta-data in the code
=> easier to sanity check and debug.
- Now you can mix VB.NET, C#, etc (any .NET compliant language)
in the same App.
2. CLR could be seen as the natural evolution of COM and COM+,
in a way that COM has grown over the years by incremental
addition without a big effort of rationalization.
.NET (CLR + Framework) keep the advantages of COM and do the
cleanup and rationalization necessary to support the future
evolutions.

3. COM is not dead.
You can perfectly call COM component from .NET Code ("managed code")
and .NET component from COM. See MSDN for example.

Regards,
John.

"Neo Ryder" <neo_ryder@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Hi there,
>
>I would like to know what exactly is that CLR has changed, is it just a
newer
>version of COM+ or what ?. I heard someone say that .NET objects dodnot
have
>IUknown kind of stuff ? is that so ? does that mean they are not COM objects
>anymore, where do COM objects go if that be the case , what is the future
>of COM/COM+ considering the birth of CLR.
>
>thanking you all!
>Neo

What book(s)?

--
http://www.standards.com/; Programming and support for Word macros,
including converting from WordBasic to VBA; Technical reviewing; Standards;
Product functional/design/specifications
---------------
"Ian Drake" <ian@dotnetnut.com> wrote in message
news:3bb236a6$1@news.dev-archive.com...
>
> Neo,
>
> Yikes, you need to get a book on .NET, it looks like your in for a big
shock.
> No more COM(unless you want to), can still use COM+, big changes... to
many
> to list.
>
> Ian
>
>
> "Neo Ryder" <neo_ryder@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Hi there,
> >
> >I would like to know what exactly is that CLR has changed, is it just a
> newer
> >version of COM+ or what ?. I heard someone say that .NET objects dodnot
> have
> >IUknown kind of stuff ? is that so ? does that mean they are not COM
objects
> >anymore, where do COM objects go if that be the case , what is the future
> >of COM/COM+ considering the birth of CLR.
> >
> >thanking you all!
> >Neo
>

Guys correct me if i go wrong here coz i'm writing from the top of my mind.

COM Interop is a powerfull feature of the .NET framework. It allows for calling
legacy applications (COM code) from managed code, and calling managed objects
from Legacy Code.

The beauty of the sittuation is that if you already have an application you
dont have to port the whole thing to .NET, instead you can port portions
of it as neccesary to .NET and still have a complete system by interacting
with your COM or other native code through COMInterop or PInvoke.

But mind you communicating with native or legacy code involves lots of marshialling
and unmarshalling and hence as a performance consideration is not recommended.

- Tariq

"Ovidiu Platon" <ovidiupl@microsoft-lab.pub.ro> wrote:
>COM interop is there for legacy components. Don't use it unless it's
>absolutely necessary.
>Ovidiu
>
>"Djalma Santos Filho" <dsantosfilho@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3c8e6188$1@10.1.10.29...
>>
>> "John" <john_assouline@hp.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> >3. COM is not dead.
>> > You can perfectly call COM component from .NET Code ("managed code")
>> > and .NET component from COM. See MSDN for example.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >John.
>>
>> Please,
>>
>> Will COM be used only for legacy purposes or are there advantages for
>someone
>> want to continue using it?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
>