by WVerkley >> Sun, 13 Aug 2000 2:57:31 GMT
Apologies in advance for the unreasonable rant that will follow :
Why was the decision made to implement COM objects as using proxy classes in Jade 5.1??? Now the entire class hierachy and namespace will be crowded with these COM classes im using but that arnt related to anything im doing in Jade, and its created a much tighter coupling then there really should be (plus a redundancy of type information on my system).
Late-bound methods also dont seem to work...
A better solution IMHO would habe been to support an new primitive type to hold a COM object reference (like variants in VB or "OLEVariants" in Delphi). Any calls to this primitive type would not be type checked, and the compiler would simply convert them to "_jadeActiveXMethod" calls at compile time. Like VB and Delphi, this new primitive could automatically reference-count the COM object as it moves in and out of scope.
A benifit I see with the current method is that it gives you type checking on the calls to the COM object, but this is not really needed as much for external components.
Also, in the next version of Jade, it would be nice if the we had an option to prefix the names of these COM proxy classes with something user-defined, so they are less likely to clash with the names of the classes in our own application.
Wilfred.