Re: Why i am not into dll hell???

[xkp]

On 30 Mag, 11:02, "Stephany Young" <noone@localhostwrote:

If I understand you correctly, you seem to think that you have a problem
because thing are working the way they are designed to work?

No
i think i have a problem just because things are not going as i have
red they are supposed to go.
I mean, according to theory i should have a conflict (one of the cases
of dll hell) , and i want to be sure i am not having it for a real
reason and not by chance.

[=?Utf-8?B?RmFtaWx5IFRyZWUgTWlrZQ==?=]

"xkp" wrote:

On 30 Mag, 11:02, "Stephany Young" <noone@localhostwrote:

If I understand you correctly, you seem to think that you have a problem
because thing are working the way they are designed to work?

No
i think i have a problem just because things are not going as i have
red they are supposed to go.
I mean, according to theory i should have a conflict (one of the cases
of dll hell) , and i want to be sure i am not having it for a real
reason and not by chance.

Your code is working as it should (as Stephany said). I believe you are
taking the artical out of context, such as (possibly) assuming that because
things worked the way the artical describes in COM, they will still work that
way in .Net.

For example, the banner of what you posted says "Shared in-memory code
pages". Are you creating such in both DLLs from within .Net?