I only need J for file management in this project, it's a workhorse that gets its commands from C#. So I don't need WD. thought the more stable iterations of the project could use JDLLServer for cleanliness, and I still look forward to that.
I find it odd that JEXEServer would be a wrapper to JDLLServer and yet behave differently (SetB and GetB), or worse, obfuscate a JDLLServer function (SetM and GetM) by saying it's not supported. But this would not be my first surprise in this great software adventure. Martin Pelletier On 2010-10-14 20:24, Alexander Rufon wrote: > I remembered thinking that I was going to tell you that J.EXE<> J.DLL ... > but I forgot too (must have had more than 7 items in the brain). > > Another difference that you have to look out for is that J.EXE provides the > WD interfaces. For my projects, this is critical because I tend to retrieve > data from archaic hardware (machines that cut cloths, hand held devices that > track production tags, worker efficiency through serial ports, etc) which > provides interface through COM (most of the time written in VB6 with no > source code). I don't normally bother with JDLLServer since the JEXEServer is > essentially a wrapper to it. ;) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
