Why NETLOAD?

[Frank Oquendo]

Considering that you can't unload native .NET assemblies without creating
your own mechanism, why bother with NETLOAD?

Wouldn't it be easier to just add a COM wrapper to your primary class?

[Mike Tuersley]

Okay Frank, I had to read this three times before it sank in. If it where a
true .NET approach/application, why would you need to unload it? That's
where I'm confused. Does a JITed app not negate the need?

I'm *really* curious and interested to understand better where you're
coming from to make sure I'm not missing something here that'll come back
to bite me in the butt one day!

-- Mike
___________________________
Mike Tuersley
CADalyst's CAD Clinic
Rand IMAGINiT Technologies
___________________________
the trick is to realize that there is no spoon...

[Frank Oquendo]

Post by Mike Tuersley
Okay Frank, I had to read this three times before it sank in. If it
where a true .NET approach/application, why would you need to unload
it? That's where I'm confused. Does a JITed app not negate the need?

ARX files can be unloaded when their functionality is not needed but
.NET assemblies cannot. That's kind of a waste if your app does not
provide services intended to be used for the life of a session.

I'm also a big fan of the COM server approach as any ActiveX-enabled
client make use of the functionality offered by your assembly. That
makes your assembly interoperable with VLISP and VBA.

[Mike Tuersley]

Post by Frank Oquendo
ARX files can be unloaded when their functionality is not needed but
.NET assemblies cannot. That's kind of a waste if your app does not
provide services intended to be used for the life of a session.

True, I never worried too much about it since almost everything I write is
a client-specific solution that normally is intended for the life of the
session because it integrates with their ERP, MRP, or doc mgmt system.
That's one downside to being a doc mgmt expert =)

Not to argue or get you going here, but isn't the example stated tainted
because its based on ARX which is old school compared to .NET? Where I'm
confused is if .NET is truly compiled "just In time" and the programmer
does due diligence in cleaning up and disposing of the app properly, is
there any waste in the .NET environment? Is this somehing that is baggage
to pre-.NETers? Maybe a silly question, but I've been too busy to play
around and look under the hood.

Post by Frank Oquendo
I'm also a big fan of the COM server approach as any ActiveX-enabled
client make use of the functionality offered by your assembly. That
makes your assembly interoperable with VLISP and VBA.

Never dabbled with a COM server app yet. Don't suppose you have a simple
example you could send my way? =)

As always, its nice to talk shop with you Frank...hope all is well in your
corner of the world!

-- Mike
___________________________
Mike Tuersley
CADalyst's CAD Clinic
Rand IMAGINiT Technologies
___________________________
the trick is to realize that there is no spoon...

[Frank Oquendo]

Post by Mike Tuersley
Not to argue or get you going here, but isn't the example stated
tainted because its based on ARX which is old school compared to
.NET?

.NET is just another way of making use of the same API. In fact, the
managed API is still just a subset of the full ARX API.

Post by Mike Tuersley
Where I'm confused is if .NET is truly compiled "just In time"
and the programmer does due diligence in cleaning up and disposing of
the app properly, is there any waste in the .NET environment? Is this
somehing that is baggage to pre-.NETers? Maybe a silly question, but
I've been too busy to play around and look under the hood.

That's all quite possible. I guess I'm just jittery about creating
something that can't be unloaded with restarting AutoCAD. I've seen
mention of a bootstrapper assembly with commands to load and unload an
assembly. While that's workable, it still doesn't do anything to make
your assembly usable in VB/A and VLISP.

Post by Mike Tuersley
Never dabbled with a COM server app yet. Don't suppose you have a
simple example you could send my way? =)

Actually, I've got an article or two on the subject cached from my web
site (which will be back soon). I'll dig them up and forward them to
you.

Post by Mike Tuersley
As always, its nice to talk shop with you Frank...hope all is well in
your corner of the world!

Things are going well. Thanks for asking. :-)

[Mike Tuersley]

Post by Frank Oquendo
.NET is just another way of making use of the same API. In fact, the
managed API is still just a subset of the full ARX API.

Sorry, I was thinking in terms of what you/i/whoever writes, not from a
"what were talking to" standpoint. =)

Post by Frank Oquendo
While that's workable, it still doesn't do anything to make
your assembly usable in VB/A and VLISP.

Yeah, I can see you point here. Since you can add command line access with
.NET, I can't remember the last lisp routine I wrote. Sooner or later
that'll change once a client comes along wanting that compatability =(

Post by Frank Oquendo
Actually, I've got an article or two on the subject cached from my web
site (which will be back soon). I'll dig them up and forward them to
you.

Awesome! Better than code because you still need to get in the programmer's
head to follow where he's going. TIA!

-- Mike
___________________________
Mike Tuersley
CADalyst's CAD Clinic
Rand IMAGINiT Technologies
___________________________
the trick is to realize that there is no spoon...