Home › Forums › Public iMo forums › General topics

integrate EA through .NET instead COM

Wed, 05/11/2011 - 08:33 — Jurjen

I just found this comment from Mike Fechner in a different discussion. Mike said:

"Just an add-on to Marians initial comment about the COM interface. When starting new on EA integration with Progress and your version of Progress is 10.2B I do highly recomment EA's .NET Assemblies - originally also using the COM Interface but the .NET integration into the ABL performs better, it more stable, offers garbage collection and compile time validation... Don't waste time on the COM interface anymore."

Originally in this discussion: http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&srchtype=discussedNews&gid=19970...

‹ shared session manager reporting??? ›

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:10 — medu
medu's picture

That could be the normal

That could be the normal approach for iMo MDA tool but going the XMI route is a better choice imho. Given the 'limited' subset of UML paradigm used it will be far easier to implement the forward/reverse functionality using plain XML, and XMI is supported by most if not UML tools... If interested I'm sure I can have it implemented in half the time&money of simply 'upgrading' to .Net assemblies ;)
m.edu
keep it simple
www.ganimede.ro
medu@ganimede.ro

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 11:03 — ede
ede's picture

integrate EA through .NET instead COM

Hi
I agree with both of you and if we did have the budget to do it again, I would definitely take the XMI route.

Eric

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:26 — medu
medu's picture

this almost looks like a

this almost looks like a fundraising call :)