On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Mark Petryk <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 4/5/2012 7:07 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is your COM server implemented in Qt?
> >
>
> My Qt app is a COM client. My Qt app (or library or class set) is a COM
> wrapper to another .exe COM server. The COM server was somewhat limited
> so I implemented a sophisticated wrapper using the Qt COM client
> functionality (QAxContainer) and enhanced it quite a bit.
>
> So, I want to now develop a Wt app that 'uses' the COM wrapper I have
> already written in Qt, so that I can ultimately talk to the destination
> .exe COM server using my Qt wrapper.
>
> I own all the source for the "Qt COM wrapper", so I can compile it in
> directly to a Wt app. But since everything I wrote is written in Qt so
> I really need to be able to compile my Wt app with Qt.
>
> Here would be a schematic:
>
> .exe COM server <--- Qt COM wrapper <--- Wt app ---> website
>
> > If the former, can't you use Wt + XPCOM to communicate with your
> > Qt-implemented COM server?
> >
>
> I am not familiar with XPCOM but I suppose I should be (reading now).
> But, if I'm understanding what you're suggesting, I would have to
> rewrite my "COM Wrapper" to use XPCOM rather than the ActiveQt library.
>
>
I though your Qt app was a COM server, therefore you would use XPCOM + Wt
to communicate.
Given that your Qt is a COM client, you need one of these:
a) Full rewrite of the Qt part (which is what you don't want)
b) Use wtwithqt to link your Qt wrapper directly. May or may not work.
c) Turn your Qt wrapper into a server, be it COM server, IPC (DBUS, zeromq,
named pipes, etc), TCP/IP, etc
(c) in the form of COM server is probably the more future-proof choice. If
it may happen that the Qt wrapper and the Wt app run on different
computers, then I'd go for zeromq, ICE, raknet, TCP/IP or alike.
> > Also, I fail to see how CMake is relevant here.
> >
>
> All I was saying was that the wtwithqt sample example was using CMAKE
> and Qt uses a different build system. It may not be relevant. That's
> kind-of why I was asking.
You can build Qt applications with CMake. Support for Qt in CMake is very
good, in fact.
--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
witty-interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
