.NET

Reply
Contributor
Acmx
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎01-07-2006
Message 1 of 9 (94 Views)

Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

94 Views, 8 Replies
01-08-2006 09:10 AM
Hello All !

I was interested in the question of serialization of arbitrary
data associated with AutoCAD objects such as document,
entities, layouts using .Net serialization mechanism.

As a result I wrote a small .Net library which implements
this way of serialization. Now it allows arbitrary properties
serialization using Microsoft [Serializable] attribute for
documents, objects, layers, layouts. Including serialization of
drawing entity references.

Also the library overlaps some others commonly used tasks.

The library assemblies are available at http://acmx.chat.ru
*karl
Message 2 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-08-2006 03:21 PM in reply to: Acmx
Ok looks interesting are youi developing this for sale

If so how much for source??

wrote in message news:5053500@discussion.autodesk.com...
Hello All !

I was interested in the question of serialization of arbitrary
data associated with AutoCAD objects such as document,
entities, layouts using .Net serialization mechanism.

As a result I wrote a small .Net library which implements
this way of serialization. Now it allows arbitrary properties
serialization using Microsoft [Serializable] attribute for
documents, objects, layers, layouts. Including serialization of
drawing entity references.

Also the library overlaps some others commonly used tasks.

The library assemblies are available at http://acmx.chat.ru
Contributor
Acmx
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎01-07-2006
Message 3 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-09-2006 07:41 AM in reply to: Acmx
I'm developing this library for fun and for sale too. I'm going to add some more functionality.

Could you write me what kind of license do you ask about at acmx@chat.ru ?
*Tony Tanzillo
Message 4 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-09-2006 02:50 PM in reply to: Acmx
Hi. Sorry to say this, but...

Rules and guidelines that govern most serious software
development, preclude licensing third party code that
does not include source, unless if is from an established,
reputable business entity that has been in business for
some amount of time; and it provides some significant
functionality that could not be arrived at via programming,
without significant expense.

Another major problem with your code, is that it appears
to be an 'alternative' API/object model, where the main
purpose is to create a dependence on itself, that is for the
most part, illegitmate.

In other words, I and many others don't need your code to
persist data in AutoCAD drawings. The API's we have can
be used to do that, and of course, we can also take the
same approach, and make the code we write that does the
same thingreusable, and most importantly, we have and
own the source.

Allowing one's self to be at your mercy, and to become
dependent on you, who can vanish into thin air at any
time, just as quickly as you appeared, is nothing short
of foolish.

If your code or library did something significant, that
most reasonably competent programmers could not do
on their own with some programming, and you were
an established, reputable business that had an existing
customer base; or demonstrated that you were making
a major investment in becoming that, then and only
then, can one give serious consideration to licensing
anything from you.

However, in absense of those prerequisites, my advice
to you, would be to not waste too much of your time
developing something if you're doing that mainly for the
purpose of licensing it to others, without also providing
them with the source code, or at least, with the option
to purchase it for a fee.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

wrote in message news:5053906@discussion.autodesk.com...
I'm developing this library for fun and for sale too. I'm going to add some more functionality.

Could you write me what kind of license do you ask about at acmx@chat.ru ?
Contributor
Acmx
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎01-07-2006
Message 5 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-11-2006 09:57 AM in reply to: Acmx
Hello. Thank you for your attention and recall to provide a customer
with source.

And an agreement under which a customer is provided with code and source
is called licensing.

As for code - there are no question because, as you mentioned, a code
without source has non-zero value only for the big program products.

As for source - the first question to a customer is what license agreement
do he want to buy source under. It affects to a price.

In general at this stage the library is written for fun. If anybody needs,
for instance, a reusable source of a separate persistency mechanism like there
is only, I'll be able to write it for him when I have a free day.

By the way publishing the Acmx library I do not prevent you from taking
the same approach and creating something .Net-like for AutoCAD in your own.

What about the 'alternative' object model, it coexists with the standard AutoCAD
.net and COM object models not substituting them as you can see from Acmx classes
documentation. Writing an application which, for instance, operates with a set
of AutoCAD objects coupled with a set of data domain objects in memory,
this approach is nearly obvious.

The Acmx library is not making something significant, it is, in my honest opinion,
a collection of some ideas I had about what can be useful in connection with .Net and AutoCAD.
*Tony Tanzillo
Message 6 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-11-2006 11:54 AM in reply to: Acmx
>> As for source - the first question to a customer is
>> what license agreement do he want to buy source
>> under. It affects to a price.

That's fine. As long as they have the option.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com
*Tony Tanzillo
Message 7 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-11-2006 01:35 PM in reply to: Acmx
>>>>>>>>
What about the 'alternative' object model, it coexists with the standard AutoCAD
.net and COM object models not substituting them as you can see from Acmx classes
documentation. Writing an application which, for instance, operates with a set
of AutoCAD objects coupled with a set of data domain objects in memory,
this approach is nearly obvious.
<<<<<<<

The degree of abstraction and the need to write to another
'alternative' API is not something I can sanction only for the
sake of automating persistence. There needs to be a more
compelling reason.

Writing to an alternative API means that no longer can code
be maintained or worked with by anyone having experience
and familiarity with nothing more than the Autodesk APIs and
the .NET framework.

If I needed to hire programmers, should I post a help-wanted
advertisement, seeking persons that are experienced with the
"Acmx library" ?????

How many respondents do you think there'll be ?

I've nothing against the idea of using proprietary, third-party
APIs, but they must offer very compelling reasons to justify a
dependence on them, and the risks that come with that.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com
*Fred Chateau
Message 8 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-13-2006 10:18 AM in reply to: Acmx
"Tony Tanzillo" wrote ...

> The degree of abstraction and the need to write to another 'alternative'
> API is not something I can sanction only for the sake of automating
> persistence. There needs to be a more compelling reason.

From an educational perspective, I think it's quite helpful. It's
interesting to see generics applied to a real-world situation.

--
Regards,

Fred Chateau
fchateauAtComcastDotNet
Contributor
Acmx
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎01-07-2006
Message 9 of 9 (94 Views)

Re: Using [Serializable] and others .Net features

01-13-2006 06:32 PM in reply to: Acmx
Ok, more compelling reason is one more general tendency in software development - creating more unified helper API for existing ones simplifying the clients code particularly for some range of applications.

I agree that knowledge of original APIs is most valuable!
Alternative APIs often have some generalizations that help you
not to hire a lot of programmers to implement or maintain code.
E.g. it's easy to provide objects, layers, layouts, documents
with an interface like IHavingNamedProperties than write or
maintain different code for each case.

>>>>How many respondents do you think there'll be ?
:-)))
May be zero, I'm so busy last time

Yes, what about third-party code without sources, may be it risky at the beginning, but developing over raw original API is sometimes costly.
Announcements
Are you familiar with the Autodesk Expert Elites? The Expert Elite program is made up of customers that help other customers by sharing knowledge and exemplifying an engaging style of collaboration. To learn more, please visit our Expert Elite website.
Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.