[racket] MysterX poll

From: Greg Hendershott (greghendershott at gmail.com)
Date: Thu Dec 29 14:41:53 EST 2011

I have used the basic COM layer (2.1-2.2) to do some one-off
utilities. Such as moving data from MS SQL Server using the ADODB COM
interface, into an Excel application using its COM interface.

Although I'm not actively using those utilities at the moment, it
seems a shame to lose that interoperability tool in the future.

Having said that, unfortunately I'm not in a position to volunteer to
help maintain it. So asking you to keep it makes me feel like one of
the animals in The Little Red Hen http://oaks.nvg.org/fta.html#ftb2

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Matthew Flatt <mflatt at cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> If you use MysterX for COM/ActiveX work under Windows --- or if you are
> interested in using it --- please drop me a note.
> If no one is using MysterX, then it may go away, because we have
> trouble maintaining it.
> If you tell me that you're (interested in) using MysterX, please also
> let me know which parts you (would) use:
>  * The basic COM layer (sections 2.1-2.2 in the MysterX reference)?
>  * The event layer (section 2.3 in the MysterX reference)?
>  * The ActiveX layer (section 3 in the MysterX reference)?
> Depending whether anyone uses MysterX and which parts are used, then it
> might get replaced by an `ffi/unsafe/com' library that is implemented
> in Racket, that covers the basic COM layer of MysterX, and that also
> leverages the FFI to better support calling COM methods directly (e.g.,
> with a `define-com-class' form) instead of relying only on IDispatch.
> ____________________
>  Racket Users list:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/users

Posted on the users mailing list.