COM Support

prh · Post by **prh** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 8:40 am

Does anybody know how hard it would be to actually add COM support into the scripting ?

dont_know_at_all · Post by **dont_know_at_all** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 3:30 pm

It's not too hard but it would be extensive. I am a bit leery of exposing MQ to a bunch of VB hackers, though.

VB is the anti-christ.

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 4:35 pm

VB would make the anti-christ weep.

I don't see a reason to mess with the language, if there is something you want it to do, then someone could probably integrate it. However, I rather like the idea that it is it's own language and requires study/time.

Neoplex · Post by **Neoplex** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 8:07 pm

Vb > the anti christ rofl

Sorry I couldnt help but laugh haha

Imperfect · Post by **Imperfect** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:06 pm

Whats wrong with WSH support?

dont_know_at_all · Post by **dont_know_at_all** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:59 pm

We already have a scripting language.

Don't start me on javascript.

prh · Post by **prh** » Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:25 am

Actually I weren't really interested in the COM support for the scripting purposes, but mainly the ability to do all the things you can't do in the scripting, and which would be overkill to add in MQ itself...

For instance, a COM component for sending an SMS to all guildies :)

/macro SMS RAID NOW ASSHOLES !! LOG ON !!! :)

Webservices, I've exposed most of our guilds dkp system as a WebService also, and writing the client in MQ seems kinda overkill, and a lot harder than making a very simple COM component in .NET which can call the webservice for me..

My point is that COM already has so many useful components, after all, why reinvent the wheel....

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Tue Oct 07, 2003 9:24 am

dont_know_at_all wrote:VB is the anti-christ.

No, Bill Gates is the antichrist. Microsoft is the Whore of Babylon, taking our money to screw us... and Barney is the Beast of the Apocalypse. Don't even get me started on Teletubbies