Support for COM?

Jan 3, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Jeff, I'm looking froward to find the time to try the assembly.  In the meantime I see that you've chosen to design the assembly as a hierarchy of generic classes.  You have made the assembly unavailable to COM so you are aware the design means it cannot be called from COM applications such as Excel's VBA.  Did you consider designing the assembly as a series of interfaces that could be exposed to COM even if the concrete implementations are based on generic classes?  I ask because my first thought was to try to register the assembly for COM and to use it from Excel (which obviously was a non-starter and led me to the directive in assemblyinfo).  I may be way off but I can imagine there will be people who might be interested in using the results of your efforts and who are able to use a language like VBA and an environment like Excel but not be so comfortable using VS 2008 and C# or VB.NET (or another .NET language).
Jan 3, 2009 at 6:09 PM
Hello, and thank you for the feedback!

My first thought on supporting Office was to allow people to integrate Gepsio with Office applications, such as Excel, through Visual Studio Tools for Office (VSTO). This would allow developers to write .NET code to use Gepsio while still working within an Excel environment. However, when I consider your post, I can imagine that there may be folks who want to or need to write VBA macros within one of the Office applications without using VSTO. As you correctly pointed out, Gepsio's first CTP does not support this today. This is simply a matter of priorities; there is no design philosophy that prevents Gepsio from being used in that kind of environment.

I will do some research into this topic and will certainly consider formal COM support. I don't have a timeline for this yet, but I will certainly keep it in mind for a future revision.

Thanks for considering Gepsio!