topic ArcMap .NET add-in vs. classic COM extensibility in ArcObjects SDK Questions

ArcMap .NET add-in vs. classic COM extensibility

MichaelLacy — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:33:48 GMT

I am working on a project to replace an old ArcView application that used custom Avenue scripts. We originally chose to use the new add-in model to create custom components in C#. However, we discovered another group may be developing application framework customizations using classic COM extensibility. (The terminology can get a little confusing and nebulus, so to be precise, I am talking about these two methods: Add-ins and COM Application Framework Customizations.)

I would prefer to stick with the newer add-ins if they can play together nicely with the other group's COM extensions in the same ArcMap instance. The documentation says that add-ins don't support all the functionality of the COM extensions, but they appear to provide everything we will need. Plus, they seem simpler and don't require all the COM registry entries.

Questions: Are add-ins the preferred method for new development? Will ESRI continue to support the older COM extensibility or is the plan to phase that out?

(Yes, I'm trying to justify using add-ins with something more substantial than just my personal preference.)

Thanks,
Mike

Re: ArcMap .NET add-in vs. classic COM extensibility

RichardWatson — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:48:44 GMT

The latest technique is always the one to choose when doing new development. So, I'd say that you choice to go with add-ins is solid.

I seriously doubt that anyone from ESRI is going to post on the death of COM extensibility in the forums.

If there is any breaking news on this then I'd expect it to be announced at the upcoming Developer Summit. In past summits, ESRI has made it clear with the ArcGIS Runtime that they want to limit customization possibilities. Of course, that is a 2 edged sword. On the one hand customizations limit their ability to change the system. On the other hand, the ability to customize the system has been a key component of their success. In the end it is all about the balance.

Re: ArcMap .NET add-in vs. classic COM extensibility

DuncanHornby — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:20:34 GMT

Michael,

I've personally turned my back on COM extensibility in favour of AddIns as as you say there is no nightmare installation issues. Simply drop the AddIn in a folder and point ArcMap to the folder, hey presto its installed. Even a non-power user can do that.

The only issue I have come across within AddIns is that when porting say an older 2005 VS project you have to rebuild the whole toolbar from scratch. A bit of a pain but acceptible.

Duncan

Re: ArcMap .NET add-in vs. classic COM extensibility

VickiMartinez — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:59:29 GMT

Mike-
I would be very interested to hear how this works out, if you end up using mixed extension types. I would also like to move towards add-ins, but we have some extensions that must continue to be implemented using COM. I suppose in the end, we are just going to have to try it out, but it would be interesting to hear your results.

Thanks-
V