![]() |
Telelogic System Architect (steve huntington) | ![]() |
Topic Title: Changes to COM interface from 10.1 to 10.4 Topic Summary: What the COM interface exposes and where has changed. Created On: 24-May-2006 23:48 Status: Read Only |
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch |
![]() |
![]()
|
![]() |
|
Has anyone else run into problems with their custom macro code or COM code in the migration from <=10.1 to >=v10.3?
I just upgraded from v10.1.11 of SA (with the C4ISR, Simulator, and XML add-ins) to v10.4.13 and have run into some issues with my custom code. I have written numerous applications to enhance the SA application and to interface SA with other applications by utilizing both the built-in VBA and the exposed COM interface. It seems that in the move from v10.1 to either v10.3 (which I skipped) or v10.4 they changed the COM interface. I have not yet found out to what extent and whether or not functionality has been removed, added, or just moved.
I certainly hope that functionality has not been removed but I wanted to know if anyone else has a jump on this so far. I've filed a ticket and will try and update this thread with my findings in the coming weeks.
Edited: 24-May-2006 at 23:50 by Jonathan Burlingame |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
My team is currently working with 10.22 and will be moving to 10.3. We have a lot of VBA enhancements and reports but started accessing the database directly instead of using the object model. Our plan is to move over to .Net or some other framework and rely as little as possible upon the actual application. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Thanks for the reply Duane. I currently only one truly VBA based enhancement. For all the other macros I just use VBA to add an icon to the toolbar and make a call to the external application. I have written the enhancements on the .NET 1.1 Framework using C#. I was told not to access the database directly for a couple of reasons a) it's not stable - they can (and do) change it's layout b) there is no support from Telelogic if you do this
The reason I have been using the COM interface is because it allows me to free myself from VBA and work in a more powerful language - whether it be C/C++, C#, or VB6/.NET. Also, the COM interface uses most of the same parts of the API that are exposed in the VBA interface so it should be more stable than the database. Additionally, there are a lot of routines in SA that I would have to duplicate the functionality for which has both an upfront cost and a maintenance cost.
|
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
We have just experimented using .Net to produce an XML word document report in Word 2003. We reduced the speed from 10 minutes of walking through the object model to less than one second. Highly recommend it :-)
I guess we are avoiding COMs and so on to create a portable reporting service divorced from reliance upon SA by reading data from the database to XML word, excel or a powerpoint document. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Hi Duane
this is something we are considering as a future reporting route. Are you able to export diagrams from the repository using this method or are your reports text based only? Thanks Ed |
|
![]() |
FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2009 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.