Hmm, this is not what I expected but is less work on their part since so
much has been invested in COM and so much of DirectX is COM based. I
would have expected, as I have done several times, to take the body of
C++ code and wrap the raw C++ code itself with a MC++ wrapper. This is
much cleaner and is much better in performance (IJW transition thunk
versus a COM transition thunk). Then that "body" of code is "exposed" to
managed clients like C# and VB.NET. You get the opportunity to
"refactor" your code and interfaces as well exposing only what you want
in the "new" MC++ wrapper. But, I guess since DirectX is so tied to COM
it was too much work. This was the reason why Visual Studio and VSIP did
not expose managed interfaces - hundreds of existing COM Interfaces.

The issue is performance. I would expect that this allows more Managed
programmers to use Direct/X now without going to C++ but not the lions
share where every last bit of performance counts (i.e. games and other
major users of Direct/X)

----------------------------------------------
Sam Gentile
Microsoft .NET Consultant
http://www.samgentile.com/
Read my .NET Blog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0105852/



-----Original Message-----
From: Moderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Craig Andera
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] DirectX9

Hmm. Well, I've been playing with it rather a lot for the last month or
two (I've got some code up at [1]) and from what I can tell, it's not
really removing COM Interop per se. It appears to be a MC++ wrapper
around the existing COM interfaces. So there's still a .NET-COM
transition. Luckily, you don't have to worry about any of the interop
stuff yourself...it's wrapped up.

The API is one of the screwiest I've seen in a long time - don't expect
to get up to speed too quickly. At least, that was my experience with
Direct3D. The other areas might be better.

The docs suck pretty bad - they're flat wrong in a few places, and
mostly unhelpful in others.

[1] http://staff.develop.com/candera

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hein, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 1:53 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] DirectX9
>
>
> 100% Managed. :)
>
> From the docs:
>
> "By eliminating the Component Object Model (COM)
> interoperability layer,
> Managed DirectX improves performance." ...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard A. Hein
> Level Platforms Inc.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Franklin Gray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 10:48 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] DirectX9
>
> Is DirectX9 a 100% managed namespace working directly with the OS APIs
> or does it use some COM interlop?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] DirectX9
>
>
> That's kinda not very specific :)
>
> There is an issue with the documentation won't work with VS.NET
> 2003 unless you download and install a separate 'extras' package.
> But once I'd done this everything worked fine (so far... and I've only
> played
> with DirectDraw so far...) on my machine.
> (I'm assuming there aren't any other issues you know about...?)
>
> If you use this URL
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/downloads/l
> ist/direct
> x.as
> p
> then you can find all the stuff you need, including DX9.0 and the
> 'extras' packages.
>
> Simon
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> Simon Robinson
> http://www.SimonRobinson.com
> Coming soon - Advanced .NET Programming
> http://www.wrox.com/books/1861006292.htm
> Take your .NET knowledge to the next level
> ------------------------------------------------
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shawn Wildermuth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 10:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] DirectX9
>
>
> > FYI...There are some problems with DX9/C# and the Final Release of
> > VS.NET 2003.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shawn Wildermuth
> > Author of "Pragmatic ADO.NET"
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://adoguy.com/book
> > http://ONDotNet.com
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Moderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ben
> > > Kloosterman
> > > Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 5:48 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] DirectX9
> > >
> > >
> > > For those interested you can now download the Managed
> > > DirectX9 SDK and get a working C# app loading meshes etc
> > >
> > > C#
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=59239
> > 3A7-C677-4023-
> > 8B27-94E61141E9C6&displaylang=en
> >
> > You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe
> from
> > Advanced DOTNET, or subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at
> > http://discuss.develop.com.
> >
> > You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe
> from
> Advanced DOTNET, or
> > subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at
> http://discuss.develop.com.
> >
> >
>
> You can read messages from
> the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from
> Advanced DOTNET, or
> subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
>
> You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive,
> unsubscribe from
> Advanced DOTNET, or
> subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
>
> You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive,
> unsubscribe from Advanced DOTNET, or
> subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
>

You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from
Advanced DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.

You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from Advanced 
DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.

Reply via email to