Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> The documentation seems to suggest that MS COM is based on some 
> open-standard COM with a few extensions, and that it's *supposed* to 
> interoperate with other implementations of that standard.

I see.  The number of "standard" implementations of the same idea is tremendous.

> (Admittedly, if it's anything like IE and its "standards", this won't be 
> much fun...)

To be fair, a lot of what IE does was done before the post-hoc standards 
were written. Backward compatibility is a bitch.

> Give me ARexx any day. :-P

Agreed. That was pretty cool.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message