On 10/18/10 17:46, Jim Starkey wrote:

> Two pieces of advice, though. Make it COM, not almost COM or like COM
> or virtually COM.

Some problems exist. The main is implementation of QueryInterface(). I
do not want to have (for example) request, obtained by QueryInterface(),
and therefore having no idea with what attachments it's related.
Certainly, it's possible to add trivial explicit method, performing this
action to interface, but

Request* Attachment::compileRequest(....)

looks much better. With this approach, having correct request always
means it's ready for start.
Or may be it's really worth thinking about exact COM?

> Second, don't bother the DCOM -- do your own
> networking and marshalling.

Definitely our own networking will remain for connectivity.