You are correct, Neil.  You can do it, but look carefully first.

You can "wrap" old style COM code in a .NET wrapper.  This is what ESRI
has had to do with ArcObjects, for example.  The wrapper can be more or
less "thick".  ESRI has made their wrapper as thick as they can, as
there is a performance hit every time you cross the .NET -> COM
boundary; thus they don't want you to have to make a zillion calls to
COM objects.  If I were them, I'd be REALLY P.O. ed, having just made a
(several million dollar?) investment in a complete re-write to COM, when
MSoft announced .NET...

On the other hand, you need to think carefully about what you're trying
to do.  While you Could use an ActiveX GUI control in .NET, it's ugly
and it's mother dresses it funny.  It's better to convert to a fully
native .NET equivalent.  On the other hand, I think that what Eric B.
describes as their approach -- re-using a lot of back-end, non-visual
code might make a lot of sense so long as you don't have to jump that
fence very often (as measured in computer, not human, time).

On the other other hand, our considered opinion is that in general you
shouldn't be thinking about converting COM (e.g., VB code) to .NET; you
should be thinking re-architect and re-write.  You COULD do it; you just
get so much better results if you go with the flow and do truly native
.NET.

-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Havermale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 8:48 PM
To: SCISOFT; 'MapInfo-L'
Subject: RE: MI-L MapBasic vs VisualStudio .NET ... MapXtreme 2004

Up the learning curve... without cramps?  I have a follow-on question.
From
our software engineers I have been told that there may be some sort of
intermediate step that essentially puts a .NET-wrapper around WIN32 code
permitting such legacy code to be used in the NET environments?  Is this
a
safe and reliable "first move" for legacy code or is this more like
buying
re-treaded tires?  They look great on the rack, have a low cost, but
tend to
fly apart under stress and fast speeds.

MidNight Mapper
Aka neil

-----Original Message-----
From: SCISOFT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 1:26 PM
To: 'MapInfo-L'
Subject: RE: MI-L MapBasic vs VisualStudio .NET ... MapXtreme 2004

It's gratifying to see some accurate info about .NET being presented by
Eric
Blasenheim, and I'm sure his comments about MapInfo's conversion to the
platform / framework will be well received.

Something that has been discussed (well, more along the lines of
conjecture
really) is how the MapBasic language and the MBX package will fit into
the
.NET versions of MapInfo Professional and MapXtreme 2004. 

Personally, I find .NET amazingly rich and powerful compared with Win32
programming, and (while I appreciate that MI will continue to use
existing
"Win32" components) it's my guess and hope that the "new" geometry
language
for MapInfo products will be light years ahead in its ease of use,
compared
with the arcane MB. 

I guess it's the transition from the weirdness of MB to the facility of
the
"new" geometry language that worries people. 

Ian Thomas
GeoSciSoft - Perth, Australia


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 15 September 2004 11:00 AM
> To: Ian Tidy
> Cc: MapInfo-L; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: MI-L MapBasic vs VisualStudio .NET ... MapXtreme 2004
> 
> Interesting thread. Let me try and squash a few misconceptions.
> 
(BIG SNIP)
> 
> Keep the information coming.
> 
> Eric Blasenheim
> Software Architect
> MapInfo Corporation

(EVEN BIGGER SNIP)



---------------------------------------------------------------------
List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com |
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message number: 13333

---------------------------------------------------------------------
List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com |
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message number: 13334



---------------------------------------------------------------------
List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com |
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message number: 13337

Reply via email to