Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Soapbox
  4. I really dislike half assed COM server implementations

I really dislike half assed COM server implementations

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Soapbox
comsysadmin
23 Posts 6 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P Pete OHanlon

    Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:

    the internal threads the COM object created just wouldn't die

    I've seen this before, and it normally means the reference counting is screwed up. In other words, there's a whole hunka memory leaking going on in there.

    Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads

    "Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos

    My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility

    J Offline
    J Offline
    Jorgen Sigvardsson
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    It is weird though, because when you run it in-proc, the server is unloaded quicker than lightning as soon as you release the last reference. Running a COM server as out-proc that was intended to be run in-proc, is a hack. I can't blame them for it not working properly. But hey, desperate times call for desperate measures!

    -- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • F fjdiewornncalwe

      I feel your pain. I've been going through the same crappola over the last month or so as well. They didn't call it COM hell for nothing, you know. :doh:

      I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.

      J Offline
      J Offline
      Jorgen Sigvardsson
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      When done right, COM is nice. I don't fear the low level nature of it. I fear situations where they put a Delphi programmer on the task, because those development environments are so far removed from the complexities of COM. You can't expect a Delphi programmer to hack it. It's like asking a .NET guy to do great work with J2EE - it can be done, but I wouldn't recommend it if the app is to be shipped in a short time frame, or if the development team is one person.

      -- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J Jorgen Sigvardsson

        I am going to fight another battle tonight, to try to ward off ill behaving inproc COM servers. In all likelihood, the war will not be over. I dont't know how many times I have had to put up with this shit. :mad: My users see my app crash, so I'm the bad guy. I really don't like that... Wish me luck!

        -- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit

        J Offline
        J Offline
        Jorgen Sigvardsson
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        Problem solved. Bypassed the Co* layer, to instantiatie the object myself. This gives me full control of the DLL lifetime. Also made the developer fix the bugs in his implementation (I will probably find new ones next week, so don't worry - I'll still have a job to do). Push to customers on monday morning. Weekend saved! Have a good one!

        -- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        Reply
        • Reply as topic
        Log in to reply
        • Oldest to Newest
        • Newest to Oldest
        • Most Votes


        • Login

        • Don't have an account? Register

        • Login or register to search.
        • First post
          Last post
        0
        • Categories
        • Recent
        • Tags
        • Popular
        • World
        • Users
        • Groups