.NET
Reply
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic to the Top
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
*KWBrown
.NET terminolog
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
82 Views, 3 Replies
07-15-2005 12:27 AM
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
*KWBrown
Re: .NET terminolog
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-15-2005 12:29 AM in reply to:
*KWBrown
... and ladies, < sorry >
"KWBrown" wrote in message
news:4902365@discussion.autodesk.com...
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
"KWBrown"
news:4902365@discussion.autodesk.com...
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
*Albert Szilvasy
Re: .NET terminolog
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-15-2005 08:35 AM in reply to:
*KWBrown
1. No new name has been invented. "We" simply call them ".net addin", ".net
plugin" or ".net extension".
2. built with the "AutoCAD .NET API" or built on top of the "AutoCAD managed
API".
3. built with the "AutoCAD COM API". Of course, the same ".net addin" can
use both the COM API and .NET API.
Albert
"KWBrown" wrote in message
news:4902365@discussion.autodesk.com...
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
plugin" or ".net extension".
2. built with the "AutoCAD .NET API" or built on top of the "AutoCAD managed
API".
3. built with the "AutoCAD COM API". Of course, the same ".net addin" can
use both the COM API and .NET API.
Albert
"KWBrown"
news:4902365@discussion.autodesk.com...
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
*KWBrown
Re: .NET terminolog
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-15-2005 02:30 PM in reply to:
*KWBrown
Thanks Albert,
I thought perhaps snappy acronyms or buzz words may have evolved.
Kerry
"Albert Szilvasy" wrote in message
news:4902813@discussion.autodesk.com...
1. No new name has been invented. "We" simply call them ".net addin", ".net
plugin" or ".net extension".
2. built with the "AutoCAD .NET API" or built on top of the "AutoCAD managed
API".
3. built with the "AutoCAD COM API". Of course, the same ".net addin" can
use both the COM API and .NET API.
Albert
"KWBrown" wrote in message
news:4902365@discussion.autodesk.com...
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
I thought perhaps snappy acronyms or buzz words may have evolved.
Kerry
"Albert Szilvasy"
news:4902813@discussion.autodesk.com...
1. No new name has been invented. "We" simply call them ".net addin", ".net
plugin" or ".net extension".
2. built with the "AutoCAD .NET API" or built on top of the "AutoCAD managed
API".
3. built with the "AutoCAD COM API". Of course, the same ".net addin" can
use both the COM API and .NET API.
Albert
"KWBrown"
news:4902365@discussion.autodesk.com...
Excuse me gentlemen, if necessary, for appearing pedantic ..
Regarding .NET terminology :
What are "we" calling the following.
1: An assembly for use in ACAD
Arx hardly suits ..
2: The process when using the Managed Wrapped ARX classes.
IE, built with the < ... >
3: How about the process of using the COM interface from .NET
particularly when it can be differentiated from [2] above.
4: Any others ??
Regards
Kerry
