Re: Must TLB be distributed with app?

From: Alex (gunsh_at_gunsh.STOPSPAM.com)
Date: 03/14/04 

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 00:04:50 +0100

"Brian Muth" <bmuth@mvps.org> wrote:

>I would need to understand your requirements better before advising.
>Remember, you can set the security settings of your COM object to insist on
[snip]

Thanks again Brian,

Unfortunately, my requirements are quite specific. Authorizing clients
is not an issue here. I wouldn't want the users to even be aware about
the private functionality. If the private functionality must be
advertised in a type library, then it isn't very private any more.

My interfaces are dual actually (I thought I said IDispatch before).
If I understand the matter correctly, clients that don't use IDispatch
will experience no problem even with no type library. Clients that
rely on IDispatch must have a properly registered type library.

Now, if I implemented IDispatch from scratch and provided all the bits
and pieces myself, I might get away without a type library, but it
doesn't sound neither smart nor easy.

What I need is to disallow distribution of a type library (used only
for development) and still have fully functional dual interfaces. It
seems to be possible but not at all easy.

As for the interface outside of a library block... yes, I knew about
it and it would probably be a way to go if C++ clients were my primary
and only concern. But can Visual Basic access this interface for
instance? 

-- 
Alex

Relevant Pages