Friday, February 17, 2012

Implementing a VB6 COM interface in VB.Net - it's not all roses!

Not long after my revelation last week, that VB.Net could implement my VB6 COM interface that had a "optional string" parameter, I ran into a brick wall: VB.Net cannot implement a COM interface where a "Public Property" that passes variables by-reference has been exposed. ie. it can't implement this VB6 code:


Public Property Let MyProperty(sValue As String)
...
End Property


Try it and you get the following error:

Implementing property must have matching 'ReadOnly' or 'WriteOnly' specifiers.

This is a known bug and the only solution is to modify your COM interface (in your original VB6 dll) so that the arguments are passed by-value:


Public Property Let MyProperty(ByVal sValue As String)
...
End Property


Which, under the covers, changes the COM interface from:


[id(0x68030000), propput]
HRESULT MyProperty([in, out] BSTR* );


to


[id(0x68030000), propput]
HRESULT MyProperty([in] BSTR );


But of course, I don't want to change the COM interface - I want to implement the interface that has already been defined and is already being used by multiple legacy applications.

Or I can use C#, which handles these Public Properties just fine.

So I'm caught in a bind - only C# can handle the Public Properties, and only VB.Net can handle the Optional String Parameters. I'm going to have to break my COM interface and force multiple client recompilations... OR use a VB6 COM facade that calls my .Net dll.

A tough choice - yuck, yucky, or yuckier?

Monday, February 13, 2012

HOWTO: Replace a VB6 dll with a C# dll when methods have optional string parameters

My quest to replace my VB6 COM dll with a C# dll continues. In my last post I resolved the problems I was having where early binding to the DLL didn't work, but late binding did.

The problem I need to address this time is handling a VB6 method that has an optional String parameter. Something like:


Public Sub TestMethod(ByVal sArgIn As String, Optional sArgOut As String)


Looking in the TypeLibrary for the DLL (the *.IDL file we get from the OLEVIEW tool), we see this:


HRESULT TestMethod(
[in] BSTR sArgIn,
[in, out, optional] BSTR* sArgOut);


Creating the TLB via the MIDL command works, but it gives the following warning:

.\MyDll13.IDL(30) : warning MIDL2400 : for oleautomation, optional parameters should be VARIANT or VARIANT * : [optional
] [ Parameter 'sArgOut' of Procedure 'TestMethod' ( Interface '_TestClass' ) ]


I'll now go ahead and create my .Net DLL. When I use .Net to implement the interface, it stubs the C# method as:


using System.Runtime.InteropServices;

namespace MyDllNet
{
[ProgId("MyDll.TestClass")]
[ComVisible(true)]
[Guid("D860A2A8-5003-4714-AE59-918FE2B0FC42")]
public class MyProxyClass : MyDll13ModifiedTA.TestClass
{
public string GetVersion()
{...}

public void TestMethod(string sArgIn, [OptionalAttribute]ref string sArgOut)
{...}
}
}


This looks good. After completing the code and compiling it, I run my original VB6 app which uses the TestMethod method from a VB6 app via late binding. It works fine when I pass two parameters, but if I only pass one parameter it falls over with "Run-time error '13' Type mismatch". Interestingly, the VB6 app which uses early binding works with both one or two parameters passed!






C# DLL implements IDL with optional BSTR* argument
VB6 BindingPass One ArgPass Two Args
Early BindingOKOK
Late BindingOKError "Type mismatch"


Plan B. Plan B is to change the optional parameter in the IDL from BSTR* to VARIANT*. According to the MIDL error message, VARIANT* is the right type to use for an optional parameter in COM. Note that I'm not changing the original VB6 COM component, I'm just changing the definition in the Type Library.

Creating the TLB via the MIDL command no longer raises a warning; implementing this new IDL/TLB in Visual Studio yields the following method signature:


public void TestMethod(string sArgIn, [OptionalAttribute]ref object sArgOut) {}


But does it work? No, it's worse! Now it crashes the CLR!!






C# DLL implements IDL with optional VARIANT* argument
VB6 BindingPass One ArgPass Two Args
Early BindingError clr.dll APPCRASHError clr.dll APPCRASH
Late BindingOKOK


OK, this confirms that I don't know what I'm doing! But wait, if I remove all of the code from my "TestMethod" in the .Net DLL then everything works!?! The APPCRASH must be caused by the way I'm handling the object argument in my .Net code. Time to debug into the .Net dll component and see what's going on!

And it turns out that if I try to return anything at all (apart from null) in the optional parameter, I get a System.StackOverflowException in an Unknown Module. Almost time for me to give this one away. Just one last thing to try... VB.Net!

Plan C. VB.Net VB.Net offers more comprehensive COM support, presumably because it is supposed to be a migration path for people who have VB6. So I'll create a new VB.Net class project, and add a reference to the "optional BSTR*" assembly (create in Plan A above), and implement the interface in VB.Net. The VB.Net code looks something like:


Imports System.Runtime.InteropServices

<ProgId("MyDll.TestClass")>
<Guid("D860A2A8-5003-4714-AE59-918FE2B0FC42")>
Public Class MyProxyClass
Implements MyDll13TldAssembly.TestClass

Public Function GetVersion() As String Implements MyDll13TldAssembly._TestClass.GetVersion
...
End Function

Public Sub TestMethod(ByVal sArgIn As String, Optional ByRef sArgOut As String = Nothing) Implements MyDll13TldAssembly._TestClass.TestMethod
...
End Sub
End Class


And guess what? It works! Late-binding, early-binding, the optional supplied, the optional not supplied. All combinations work!. Job done.

To Conclude: If you want to implement a VB6 COM interface, which has an optional String parameter, in .Net, then use VB.Net! (with some provisos)

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

The quest to replace a VB6 dll with a C# dll continues

I have a VB6 dll that is being used, via COM, in multiple VB6 apps, COM add-ins, and Outlook Forms. It is being used via both late binding [Set o = CreateObject("a.b")] and early binding [Set o = New a.b] techniques. The idea is to replace the VB6 dll with a C# dll that does exactly the same thing, without touching any of the other applications.

I started by creating a C# dll that implements the same COM interface. But this only got me halfway there. I had two problems:


  1. It worked for late binding, but did not work for early binding. With early binding, the program would use the old VB6 dll (if present) or display the "ActiveX component can't create object" message.


  2. It did not work for a method that had an optional String parameter eg. Public Sub TestMethod(ByVal sArgIn As String, Optional sArgOut As String)



Note that in the years that have passed since this project was started (and stopped, and restarted), I've switched from VS2008 to VS2010, and from .Net 1.1 to .Net 4.0. Some of these problems might have arisen from this change in tools.

Identifying the late binding/early binding problem

Further investigation into COM revealed that when a VB6 dll is registered, it writes the following important entries into the registry (for a VB6 DLL called "MyDll.dll" with an exposed class called "TestClass" which therefore has a ProgId of "MyDll.TestClass"):


HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\MyDll.TestClass\CLSID
+-- (Default) {ABB83F02-4012-45E4-ADD6-D2E79F45381D}


The "{ABB83...}" string is called a GUID which is basically a unique identifier. Following this in the registry, we get (amongst other things):


HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{ABB83F02-4012-45E4-ADD6-D2E79F45381D}
+-- InProcServer32
+-- (Default) C:\code\MyDll.dll
+-- TypeLib
+-- (Default) {EACF9A0F-461E-4A36-A195-43ECDE3C5FBA}
+-- VERSION
+-- (Default) 1.1


Following the TypeLib entry (and using the "VERSION" value of "1.1") we get:


HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\TypeLib\{EACF9A0F-461E-4A36-A195-43ECDE3C5FBA}
+-- 1.1
+-- 0
+-- win32
+-- (Default) C:\code\MyDll


All very boring, BUT the path to my VB6 dll is held in two different places. From what I can tell, late binding uses the first path shown at ...\CLSID\...\InProcServer32, and early binding uses the second path shown at ...\TypeLib\...\win32.

By adding the ProgId attribute to my public .Net class (like [ProgId("MyDll.TestClass")]) and registering it via regasm, my C# dll gets placed into the ...\CLSID\...\InProcServer32 entry. Well actually, because we only added the ProgId to our .Net dll, a new GUID is generated. But because late bound calls are resolved using the "MyDll.TestClass" ProgId, any late bound call to MyDll.TestClass will now use the .Net dll instead of the old VB6 dll.

But the ...\TypeLib\...\win32 registry entry still points to the old VB6 dll (or doesn't exist at all if the VB6 dll has been unregistered via "regsvr32 /u"). So early bound clients will still use the old VB6 dll, or crash.

Resolving the late binding/early binding problem

Resolving this is actually pretty straight-forward. We modify the "AssemblyInfo.cs" file in our .Net project, and insert the TypeLib GUID in there (or replace it with our TypeLib GUID if an entry is already there):


[assembly: Guid("EACF9A0F-461E-4A36-A195-43ECDE3C5FBA")]


Note that this is the TypeLib GUID not the CLSID GUID. I only knew the TypeLib GUID by inspecting the registry. I could also have found this TypeLib GUID by looking into one of the *.VBP project files for a VB6 project that early binds to this dll, where I would have seen:


Reference=*\G{EACF9A0F-461E-4A36-A195-43ECDE3C5FBA}#1.1#0#MyDll.dll#


Just to be neat and tidy, we can force .Net to use the same CLSID GUID as the VB6 dll by adding the "GUID" attribute to the .Net public class:


[ProgId("MyDll.TestClass")]
[ComVisible(true)]
[Guid("ABB83F02-4012-45E4-ADD6-D2E79F45381D")]
public class MyProxyClass : MyDllTlbAssembly.TestClass
{ ...


Next up? Solving the optional String parameter problem!

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Dull colours in MS Word 2011 for Mac using *.doc format

I had a problem where I created a nice diagram in JPG format, but when I inserted it in my Word document the colours appeared dull and washed-out. This was using Mac Microsoft Word 2011 and saving the document in Word 97-2004 compatible format (*.doc). I tried many different ways to insert the image (including dragging and dropping it in), but all resulted in the washed-out image.

dull colours.png

Saving the document as a Word document (*.docx) resolves the problem; but unfortunately I need to use *.doc format for backwards compatibility with my corporate clients.

Then I noticed that some of my earlier images in the same document were not washed out. How could this be? Reinserting these older images resulted in nice bright pictures in my *.doc document. So the problem had to be with the new images I was creating. I was using the same method I had always used to create images, but Word did not like my new ones. Something must have changed.

I quick check of the image properties, via the Finder, revealed the answer: The Color Profile

image properties.png

I had created the first images on my laptop which gave them a Color Profile of "Color LCD". The later images had been created on my secondary monitor and got a Color Profile of "DELL 3008WFP".

The Solution

The solution was to preview the image, on my laptop screen, and take a screen shot of it (using Command-Shift-4 and selecting the image). This screenshot had the required "Color LCD" Color Profile. I then dragged that screenshot into MS Word and the colours were perfect! Voila!!



Friday, May 6, 2011

Visual Studio Keyboard shortcuts that I keep forgetting!

I use so many different IDEs that there are a few key combinations that I just don't remember. Here's a quick list for next time I'm hunting:






CommandKeys
I Use
Keys
Others Use
Edit-Intellisense-ResolveAlt-Shift-F10Ctrl-+
Right Click-Go to DefinitionShift-F2F12

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Getting Novell SSL VPN working on Windows 7

I use the Novell Access Manager SSL VPN to connect to one of my customer's networks. It is a browser-based VPN client which means that you have to login via the browser and then keep the browser window open to maintain the VPN connection.

According to the documentation it will work with both Windows and Mac, and with IE, Firefox and Safari. Well it doesn't for me! Initially the only combination I could get working was IE under Windows XP. With a bit of fiddling I've finally managed to get it working for Windows 7. I write these notes for when I need to set this up again!

Attempting to launch the VPN client from IE on Windows 7 initially gives this error message:

AM.1804 : Connection to service failed.


Consulting the Novell Access Manager SSL VPN manual says that you should watch the <Users> folder. If you are quick enough, you'll see these files appear:


novl-sslvpn-service-install.exe
cacert.pem
openvpnclient.msi
PrivilegeDetector.exe
vplogin.dll


...along with a few log files. You do have to be quick though because they are deleted almost immediately.

The manual instructs you to shutdown your browser, run the novl-sslvpn-service-install.exe EXE manually and then start the browser and all should be working.

Instead, I took a simpler (and probably far less secure) route. I removed the User Account Access Control restrictions. I changed them from "Notify me when programs try to make changes to my computer" to "Never notify me". This can be done via Control Panel-User Accounts-Change User Account Control Settings

User Account Control Settings

Change from Default to "Never Notify" and click OK. After confirming this change you will be prompted to restart your computer. Once it has restarted, the SSL VPN should work! Note that it does take a while to connect and you'll have to confirm to install some insecure driver software, but it works.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Using log4net with shared DLLs


I've got a C# DLL that is used from a number of different places, including .Net EXEs, VB6 EXEs, Work and Outlook COMAddIns and also Outlook forms. It uses log4net for tracing and debugging.

I'd found log4net to be pretty reliable BUT sometimes messages weren't ending up in my log file (usually when I really needed them!). Most recently this happened today when I was trying to trace a problem in my Outlook form. I'd drag the appointment in Outlook which would fire the Item Write event on the form and, although I could loo kin the DB and see that my DLL was working, nothing was showing up in the log4net log file.



How to Investigate the Problem


To find out what was really happening, I used log4net's internal debugging. In the case of an Outlook Form, I switched it on like this:




  1. Started Outlook

  2. Started Visual Studio and opened my DLL project

  3. Switched on log4net internal debugging by modifying my log4net configuration file and changed the <log4net> to read <log4net debug="true">

  4. Used "Tools-Attach to Process" and attached to the Outlook.exe process

  5. Placed a breakpoint in the project on a line that I knew it should encounter

  6. Ran the test again...



The Problem


When I ran the test again with log4net debugging switched on, I could clearly see that log4net was unable to write to my logfile because it was locked. I didn't obviously have it locked (I had it open in TextPad but closing that didn't fix the problem). A quick scout around revealed that log4net with the RollingFileAppender by default will lock the file and keep it locked. Clearly this was the problem in my case where multiple programs all use my DLL which writes to the same logfile.



The Solution


I do want all of the instances of my DLL to write to the same log file, but I don't want them to lock the file and keep each other out. The solution was to add the following to the appender section of my log4net configuration file:




<lockingModel type="log4net.Appender.FileAppender+MinimalLock" />



This instructs log4net to get the lock, write and release the lock every time - so it doesn't keep the file locked. With this in place, all of my DLL instances now write to the logfile, ALL of the time! There is a slight performance overhead to this approach, but then I'd rather than it works slowly, than not working quickly!