> That *should* work.

> Phil.

> That *should* work.

> Phil.

> Thanks for your reply.

> I tried that, however, the implementation files for the CoClass aren't
> generated automatically.  It appears to modify the type library
> appropriately, generating a GUID etc.  But still no implementation files!

> Appreciate your suggestion.

> Prem.

> BigStew

> "Prem" <prem_removefors...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3D2A484D.5080202@hotmail.com...
> > I realise that there is a way to do this manually - ie copy and rename
> > the 1st COM OBJs implementation files and change all GUID references to
> > the 1st COM obj over to the new one, and change the actual CoClass name.
> >   I figure though, that there must be another easier way of doing this,
> > ie using some feature of the IDE.

> This may not be the "right way" to do it, but I didn't take time to ask -
> maybe someone
> out there can give a better/faster/more correct way to accomplish this?

> Curt

> "Phil Parker" <ppar...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:3d2a66b2$1_2@dnews...
> > Are you inserting the existing interface using the type library editor
and
> > selecting refresh ?

> > That *should* work.

> > Phil.

> If you require polymorphic behavior this will not achieve what you want.
> See my previous reply to Prem -- there are some details there for how to
use
> the wizards to implement the same interface on two or more components.

> Note also, you can implement existing interfaces from seperate type
library
> files by adding type libraries to the 'uses' list.

> "Curt Peterson" <c...@strikeforcesoftware.com> wrote in message
> news:3d2aed19$1_2@dnews...
> > Now when I did this recently, I created a new type library and COM
control
> > and
> > copy / pasted my previous interface definition through the "text"
> contents.
> > I didn't
> > let the new COM control pick its own CoClass name - I typed in the
correct
> > name instead.

> > This may not be the "right way" to do it, but I didn't take time to
ask -
> > maybe someone
> > out there can give a better/faster/more correct way to accomplish this?

> > Curt

> > "Phil Parker" <ppar...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> > news:3d2a66b2$1_2@dnews...
> > > Are you inserting the existing interface using the type library editor
> and
> > > selecting refresh ?

> > > That *should* work.

> > > Phil.

> Curt

> "Phil Parker" <par...@sensormatic.com> wrote in message
> news:3d2af311$1_2@dnews...
> > When you do this, you are *not* implementing the same interface, you are
> > implementing two interfaces which happen to have the same methods.

> > If you require polymorphic behavior this will not achieve what you want.
> > See my previous reply to Prem -- there are some details there for how to
> use
> > the wizards to implement the same interface on two or more components.

> > Note also, you can implement existing interfaces from seperate type
> library
> > files by adding type libraries to the 'uses' list.

> > "Curt Peterson" <c...@strikeforcesoftware.com> wrote in message
> > news:3d2aed19$1_2@dnews...
> > > Now when I did this recently, I created a new type library and COM
> control
> > > and
> > > copy / pasted my previous interface definition through the "text"
> > contents.
> > > I didn't
> > > let the new COM control pick its own CoClass name - I typed in the
> correct
> > > name instead.

> > > This may not be the "right way" to do it, but I didn't take time to
> ask -
> > > maybe someone
> > > out there can give a better/faster/more correct way to accomplish
this?

> > > Curt

> > > "Phil Parker" <ppar...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> > > news:3d2a66b2$1_2@dnews...
> > > > Are you inserting the existing interface using the type library
editor
> > and
> > > > selecting refresh ?

> > > > That *should* work.

> > > > Phil.

> Because now you have two definitions of the interface and they have to be
> maintained independently.

> A better way to do this is to:

> 1. Create ActiveX library with one implementation of the COM interface in
> question.
> 2. Create second ActiveX library.
> 3. Add type library from first ActiveX library to second ActiveX library.
> 4. Create Com object in second ActiveX library, tell new COM object that
it
> is implementing the appropriate interface from the first ActiveX library.

> You now have an object in the first library and in the second library that
> both implement the same interface.

> What I have done in some cases is define an interface that my ActiveX code
> expects, for example a plug-in interface, with no implementation at all in
> the first ActiveX library.

> --
> -- Early Ehlinger CEO, ResPower Inc - Toll-Free : 866-737-7697 --
> - RenderFarm - Lightwave , 3dSMax , Bryce , Maya , AfterEffects -
> --- www.respower.com -- 150 GHz Starting At USD$0.50/GHz*Hour ---
> ----------------- SuperComputing For the Masses! ----------------
> "I'm so busy programming my computer to let me be lazy, I never
> get any rest!" - John Kaster

> "Curt Peterson" <c...@strikeforcesoftware.com> wrote in message
> news:3d2b03bd$1_2@dnews...
> > No, I actually replaced the text from the interface definition - GUID
and
> > all -
> > I just thought maybe there was a way to grab it from the OCX and not
doing
> > the cut-and-paste thing from the other TLB.

> > Curt

> > "Phil Parker" <par...@sensormatic.com> wrote in message
> > news:3d2af311$1_2@dnews...
> > > When you do this, you are *not* implementing the same interface, you
are
> > > implementing two interfaces which happen to have the same methods.

> > > If you require polymorphic behavior this will not achieve what you
want.
> > > See my previous reply to Prem -- there are some details there for how
to
> > use
> > > the wizards to implement the same interface on two or more components.

> > > Note also, you can implement existing interfaces from seperate type
> > library
> > > files by adding type libraries to the 'uses' list.

> > > "Curt Peterson" <c...@strikeforcesoftware.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3d2aed19$1_2@dnews...
> > > > Now when I did this recently, I created a new type library and COM
> > control
> > > > and
> > > > copy / pasted my previous interface definition through the "text"
> > > contents.
> > > > I didn't
> > > > let the new COM control pick its own CoClass name - I typed in the
> > correct
> > > > name instead.

> > > > This may not be the "right way" to do it, but I didn't take time to
> > ask -
> > > > maybe someone
> > > > out there can give a better/faster/more correct way to accomplish
> this?

> > > > Curt

> > > > "Phil Parker" <ppar...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:3d2a66b2$1_2@dnews...
> > > > > Are you inserting the existing interface using the type library
> editor
> > > and
> > > > > selecting refresh ?

> > > > > That *should* work.

> > > > > Phil.

> In order to create another COM object, do *NOT* select the new CoClass
> button from the type library editor - this creates a CoClass in the type
> library but does not add a COM object to your project.  Therefore you won't
> get a .cpp and .h file generated.

> Instead, using the new COM object or new automation object wizard --
> Select File -> New -> ActiveX -> COM Object (or Automation Object).

> There are a few annoying things with BCB on this - it doesn't allow you to
> select the existing defined interface from the current type library and
> forces you to create a new interface.  However, after having created the COM
> object, you can remove the existing interface from the list of interfaces
> implemented by your component (using the tlb editor) and you can then add
> the interface you want to implement -- to do this select the coclass in the
> tlb editor, select the implements tab and right click and select 'insert
> interface' and select the interface you want to implement.  To remove an
> unused interface select it in the implements tab and press delete.  You can
> then also delete the actual interface definition using the tlb editor.

> Phil.

> "Prem" <prem_removefors...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3D2A695E.1020202@hotmail.com...

>> Hi Phil,

>> Thanks for your reply.

>> I tried that, however, the implementation files for the CoClass aren't
>> generated automatically.  It appears to modify the type library
>> appropriately, generating a GUID etc.  But still no implementation files!

>> Appreciate your suggestion.

>> Prem.

> Phil.