Is Component Object Model (COM) still popular now?

[blackbiscuit]

Dear all,

I wonder whether COM is still a popular technology today. Meanwhile,
is COM deployed in some other OS?

Thank you very much!

Best Regards,
Tony

 

[Linlin Yan]

Dear all,

I wonder whether COM is still a popular technology today. Meanwhile,
is COM deployed in some other OS?

Thank you very much!

Best Regards,
Tony

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc301471.aspx

 

[red floyd]

Dear all,

I wonder whether COM is still a popular technology today. Meanwhile,
is COM deployed in some other OS?

Thank you very much!

Did you have a C++ language question?

 

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* red floyd:

Did you have a C++ language question?

It is, in a way.

COM is one of the few successful C++ component technologies, if not the only one
(depending on one's definition of "successful"), and so it's very relevant to
know whether it's dead, and is on-topic in the same way as e.g. "Is Boost dead".

Some reduced and slightly modified versions of COM are used in e.g. Linux user
interface and in Firefox browser (XCOM). Original COM itself is however a
Windows-specific technology. But while it's necessarily used to interface to the
operating system and at higher levels in e.g. scripting, it's my impression that
it's now now not much used as a general C++ component technology, i.e., that use
of COM is something forced, not something desired and freely chosen. Microsoft
had plans to make COM more attractive via e.g. language extensions, the fabled
COM+ that in the end turned out as barely nothing more than a rebranding and
bundling of their MSMQ. But as a side-effect of that effort, their "attribute"
syntax endeth up in C++0x, so there's also a thread to standard C++...


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

 

[Linlin Yan]

* red floyd:



It is, in a way.

COM is one of the few successful C++ component technologies, if not the only one
(depending on one's definition of "successful"), and so it's very relevant to
know whether it's dead, and is on-topic in the same way as e.g. "Is Boost dead".

Some reduced and slightly modified versions of COM are used in e.g. Linux user
interface and in Firefox browser (XCOM). Original COM itself is however a
Windows-specific technology. But while it's necessarily used to interface to the
operating system and at higher levels in e.g. scripting, it's my impression that
it's now now not much used as a general C++ component technology, i.e., that use
of COM is something forced, not something desired and freely chosen. Microsoft
had plans to make COM more attractive via e.g. language extensions, the fabled
COM+ that in the end turned out as barely nothing more than a rebranding and
bundling of their MSMQ. But as a side-effect of that effort, their "attribute"
syntax endeth up in C++0x, so there's also a thread to standard C++...

Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

Thanks to Alf! That sounds so interesting!

 

[blackbiscuit]

* red floyd:



It is, in a way.

COM is one of the few successful C++ component technologies, if not the only one
(depending on one's definition of "successful"), and so it's very relevant to
know whether it's dead, and is on-topic in the same way as e.g. "Is Boost dead".

Some reduced and slightly modified versions of COM are used in e.g. Linux user
interface and in Firefox browser (XCOM). Original COM itself is however a
Windows-specific technology. But while it's necessarily used to interface to the
operating system and at higher levels in e.g. scripting, it's my impression that
it's now now not much used as a general C++ component technology, i.e., that use
of COM is something forced, not something desired and freely chosen. Microsoft
had plans to make COM more attractive via e.g. language extensions, the fabled
COM+ that in the end turned out as barely nothing more than a rebranding and
bundling of their MSMQ. But as a side-effect of that effort, their "attribute"
syntax endeth up in C++0x, so there's also a thread to standard C++...

Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

Thank you very much! It's interesting.

 

[Vaclav Haisman]

Linlin Yan wrote, On 8.5.2009 7:05:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc301471.aspx

That article is from year 2000. How does that have bearing on reality of year
2009?

 

[HGallon]

Thanks to Alf! That sounds so interesting!

I have just applied for a job which requires "excellent MS COM skills"
(sic) alongside several years' experience of C++, so unless the
advertisers have mangled the job description, COM isn't dead yet.

The job requires "SQL/PLSQL, ASP.Net and Web skills including HTML, ASP,
ASP.Net, JavaScript plus Linux/Unix. "

Also "communications protocol (serial and Ethernet networks) hardware
devices, knowledge of SCADA or other control systems, VB, Java, PHP and
database knowledge. "

Surprisingly, the job title is "Support Engineer", not "the Lord High
Everything Else".

Wish me luck.

 

[Phlip]

I have just applied for a job which requires "excellent MS COM skills"
(sic) alongside several years' experience of C++, so unless the
advertisers have mangled the job description, COM isn't dead yet.

If you have a "legacy system", then it will probably showcase the technologies
popular like 8 years ago.

The job requires "SQL/PLSQL, ASP.Net and Web skills including HTML, ASP,
ASP.Net, JavaScript plus Linux/Unix. "

Also "communications protocol (serial and Ethernet networks) hardware
devices, knowledge of SCADA or other control systems, VB, Java, PHP and
database knowledge. "

Surprisingly, the job title is "Support Engineer", not "the Lord High
Everything Else".

Wish me luck.

Hardly. I would bet "Support Engineer" means "debugger", and you are expected to
hunt bugs through all the layers of a helluva huge system. Hide cyanide capsules
in your new desk - you'll probably need them!

 

[Linlin Yan]

That article is from year 2000. How does that have bearing on reality of year
2009?

It may not express the current reality about COM, however it could
give us some views. In my opinion, the COM technology is very old and
there are too many substitutes today. However, it has not been totally
extinct yet, at least in many places, such as many IT companies in
China, where programmers are still using COM technology, as far as I
know. Last but not least, some technologies in common use such as
DirectX are based on COM.

 

[James Kanze]

If you have a "legacy system", then it will probably showcase
the technologies popular like 8 years ago.

Hardly. I would bet "Support Engineer" means "debugger", and
you are expected to hunt bugs through all the layers of a
helluva huge system. Hide cyanide capsules in your new desk -
you'll probably need them!

Most of the "support engineers" I've seen deal with user
complaints. Most of which are due to the user not having read
the manual. Or simply being stupid. It's worse than having to
maintain bad code. (I worked some support jobs early in my
career, and I can assure you that the lists that you see aren't
exagerated. He can expect about 90% of the calls to be along
the lines: the system isn't doing X, and after investigation, he
finds out the reason is because the user configured X off.)

 

[woodbrian77]

If you have a "legacy system", then it will probably showcase the technologies
popular like 8 years ago.





Hardly. I would bet "Support Engineer" means "debugger", and you are expected to
hunt bugs through all the layers of a helluva huge system. Hide cyanide capsules
in your new desk - you'll probably need them!

Please disregard such terrible advice. If the job doesn't work
out, just give them notice and trust G-d to help you.

--
Brian Wood
Ebenezer Enterprises
www.webEbenezer.net

"Then Samuel took a rock and set it up between
Mizpah and Shen. He named it Ebenezer [Rock of
Help] and said, 'Until now the L-RD has helped us.'"

 

[Phlip]

Please disregard such terrible advice. If the job doesn't work
out, just give them notice and trust G-d to help you.

But don't "give them notice" until you have the next gig lined up. (G-ds help
those who help themselves, etc..