P.S. tl;dr: No one would help her plant the seeds, harvest the wheat, make the flour, bake the bread. Everyone helped her eat the bread.
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Greg Hendershott <greghendersh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have used the basic COM layer (2.1-2.2) to do some one-off > utilities. Such as moving data from MS SQL Server using the ADODB COM > interface, into an Excel application using its COM interface. > > Although I'm not actively using those utilities at the moment, it > seems a shame to lose that interoperability tool in the future. > > Having said that, unfortunately I'm not in a position to volunteer to > help maintain it. So asking you to keep it makes me feel like one of > the animals in The Little Red Hen http://oaks.nvg.org/fta.html#ftb2 > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: >> If you use MysterX for COM/ActiveX work under Windows --- or if you are >> interested in using it --- please drop me a note. >> >> If no one is using MysterX, then it may go away, because we have >> trouble maintaining it. >> >> If you tell me that you're (interested in) using MysterX, please also >> let me know which parts you (would) use: >> >> * The basic COM layer (sections 2.1-2.2 in the MysterX reference)? >> * The event layer (section 2.3 in the MysterX reference)? >> * The ActiveX layer (section 3 in the MysterX reference)? >> >> >> Depending whether anyone uses MysterX and which parts are used, then it >> might get replaced by an `ffi/unsafe/com' library that is implemented >> in Racket, that covers the basic COM layer of MysterX, and that also >> leverages the FFI to better support calling COM methods directly (e.g., >> with a `define-com-class' form) instead of relying only on IDispatch. >> >> ____________________ >> Racket Users list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
