Adesk Engineers More "gripe" than question: "in-process" vs out-of-process

[Gary_J_Orr]

We all know that Microsoft has stopped supporting VBA as an "in process" development platform.

They did so because of security issues... they had developed a newer, more secure methodology: .net

Autodesk embraced this new methodology for programming and started building the current .net libraries, but all of them designed for in process use only (I guess they have gotten tired of us using excel (as an example) to manipulate acad objects through com-interop (activex). It's getting harder and harder to find the documentation/help references for the com objects, I just had to dig up the "developer help" from 2009 to find actual documentation which is suppossed to be part and parcel of the help system).

OK, fine. So AutoDesk really wants to force everyone to use .net over activex (com-interop).

So here is the main gripe: If you want us to use the "in-process" .net assemblies, then why do you fight so hard against giving us an in-process editor? You did it for Revit (although you keep threatening to take it away), so why not build VSTA (Visual Studio for Applications) into Autocad as you have Revit?

When you decided to transition Civil designers from the "desktop" series to the C3D series, or "Mechanical" to Inventor, those using such had little choice.

Microsoft did the same thing to you (the Autodesk developers)... they replaced an old program with another... so why haven't you done the same thing that you force us (your dedicated users) to do? Why haven't you built and imbedded VSTA for AutoCAD (it being the replacement for VBA).

Yes, I know I can use (and do) Visual Studio... but doing so changes the methodology of debugging dramatically. With an in-process programming feature we don't have to wait for the out-of-process connections to AutoCAD to be made... it's very time consuming when you have one tiny little error that you are fighting.

Do what you ask us to do: Upgrade to the current version (especially since the old version has not been supported for so long)...

Just my 2 cents.

[Rob.O]

I completely agree, although I have been doing out-of-process debuging using VS for so long now, it might take forever to de-program myself!

[dgorsman]

Developing an IDE is a time consuming, complex, and technically oriented business.  I'd rather AutoDesk focus its limited resources on engineering and design software.

Things move forward.  Sometimes for the better, sometimes not.  We aren't in the drivers seat so we just have to work with what we have, direct our own efforts to what we have control over, and accept we have to work around things we have no control over.

[Gary_J_Orr]

wow... to reply or not to reply... I don't want to start an argument, I was simply presenting an opinion to see if I was alone in it but...
If you never voice your opinion you will never be heard and things will be guaranteed to continue along the same path. Saying/doing something is the only way to induce change...

And I could only wish that I had such "limited" resources... Thanks for the laugh generated by that one.

So, I'll put you down as a "Disagrees" and leave it at that.