msdn library, every function with extensive detail, different tutorials, sample code. a real sdk, sdk's from the vendors, etc.. tons of stuff..
ok good job. maybe I should be more careful. m\\$' stuff is well documented, for the most part but I guess what I really meant is ease of navigation [through documentation]. and sensible examples that you don't have to download. msdn's documentation of MFC is a great example of the way you can easily* traverse through the documentation - but that's almost purely due to the nature of MFC. [[ for those that don't know about MFC, it's basically inheritance-oriented and you can just follow down the 'inheritance' lineage. ]]
a bad example about msdn is trying to find examples, you often [all the time?] have to download a sample program that includes too much code, when all you really need is the 'substance' of your query.
a GREAT example is sdl's documentation. I think that is the best all-around documentation model. examples are usually along with the same 'subjects' page.
...but I guess that's just my personal opinion/choice.
com is great. and the pointer issue is a non-issue if you know what you do (you know, smart pointers.. all my dx objects are smart pointers, no bug at all possible anymore).
I said it before and I'll say it again. COM SUX
let me take that back, the idea is noble. uniformity _usually_ leads to efficiency and COM certain does it. the issue isn't knowing pointers that makes it bad. it's the _knowing_ of pointers that make it vulnerable. i don't like the idea of being able to point to any object and then access that object via the pointing pointer [still with me?]
again, maybe that's just my opinion.
com runs in much more than 3 languages, it runs in about all windows languages, meaning, too, ports of languages to windows platform, say for example lisp, to bring in a quite .. strange?.. example.
a ha! that's why it sux - it's not cross-platform!
of course, it won't be cross-platform, it's not in their best interest for it to be cross-platform [or will they benefit...?] you can do all this cool com object stuff but if it's designed for a specific os then it sux. I'm thinking of activeX controls in some websites. of course, linux-users will not be able to use/display them [unless using crossover plugin?]... further adding to its suckiness.
like i said before, i think the idea of COM is great but using heavy use of pointers makes it vulnerable. almost pointless even [no pun intended, really]