Information générale
Catégorie:
COM/DCOM et OLE Automation
Terry,
You hit the nail right on the head. VFP mtdlls work very well, especially for web apps. But many of the Microsofties and Code gurus are not anxious for you to get to excited about it since there is more money to be made off pushing developers to the .NET route or existing legacy solutions...
>COM+ - what is that? WHat kind of problems is that supposed to solve. Wasn't it "self-registration". All these geeky names - what was the point! These things were ALL big positives - all the marqui speakers lauded them as a break through.
>
>Now that all the marqui super geeks received their .NET marching orders from the buffet rooms in Redmond - all of this stuff - like VFP MTDLL and COM+ - are somehow meaningless blunders of a wacky MS strategy in the days of yore!
>
>I read one of Ricks papers from the era - wow - it's the greatest thing since ankle leashes and slip-check! And now it's all being played down like a bad dream.
>
>Hard to follow!
>
>>One thing that no one has mentioned is COM+. It requires Apartment Model threading, which is what you really get with a VFP MTDLL.
>>
>>FWIW, I think the Fox team made a mistake to call these multi-threaded when they really aren't.
>>
>>>Why does VFP offer a [limited] MTDLL capability? What problems were envisioned that MTDLL would help solve?
Précédent
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement