Thomas,

>So I equated .Net n-tiers always to the number of machines involved in the process, not the dll's. Did I misinterprate you, has there been a change of meaning or was I always wrong ?<

It's not you, it's me ... I'm just lazy, I guess, and have used the terms layers/tiers interchangeably when they probably shouldn't be ... my bad.

~~Bonnie




>Hi Bonnie
>>Right. And in our app, our layers are more like tiers in that there is a physical separation (different .dlls).
>
>Usually (probably learned from COM-speak) I equate "tiers" and separation into components that MAY be spread out across different machines (incurring network latency) or may run on one machine (incurring the cost of COM parameter marshalling). "Layers" were the "logical tiers" inside the physical tiers to enforce cleaner coding.
>
>I was under the impression that separating code into different .dll's made no difference to the way the code is called inside the same runtime - no marshalling since the types are all IDL-defined as long as you are running safe inside the CLR. So I equated .Net n-tiers always to the nuber of machines involved in the process, not the dll's. Did I misinterprate you, has there been a change of meaning or was I always wrong ?
>
>regds
>
>thomas