Edit Question - KnowledgeHub

Title Body

I've been an admirer of Juval Lowy's teaching and guidance in .NET development for a number of years. He's also written one of my favorite books: Programming .NET Components. However on a recent DotNet Rocks podcast (Jan 2010) in discussing WCF/COM and .NET, he made some comments that greatly surprised me: Juval Löwy: ..... in .NET, lo and behold, every class here is a COM object. We know that. In fact, it's much more than COM because we've got the git compiling, we've got garbage collection, we've got the Security Stack.... Carl Franklin: Well, you should clarify that though. I mean, every object is not a COM object. Every object has the capabilities that a COM object does, but the .NET Framework isn't a COM library. Juval Löwy: No, no. First of all .NET is actually built on top of COM. It's all COM underneath. Then, after Carl Franklin asks for clarification on this comment: Carl Franklin: Yeah, I get that. My question was is .NET built on COM? Juval Löwy: Of course, it all COM underneath. Carl Franklin: No. I know it's intertwined and it's required, but when you new up a .NET object you're not creating a COM object. Juval Löwy: You're creating a .NET object, but all I'm saying is that .NET is built underneath. It's all C++ and COM. Carl Franklin: It is C++ but you're not registering a COM object through the COM interface. It isn't all that stuff unless you specifically do that. Juval Löwy: But some of the stuff is using COM underneath, but that's beside the point. Forget about how it's made. How do you read these comments? While I understand (and have conf

Tags (comma-separated) Cancel