 |
Newsgroups: comp.object.corba
From: "Shashank" <shashank...@gmail.com>
Date: 2 Jun 2005 00:16:39 -0700
Local: Thurs, Jun 2 2005 3:16 am
Subject: Re: What is Corba used for?
>Again, the 4th times: I was "guessing"!! Also, pls read considerations What about generated from standard corba interfaces?? >I put in previous post. Besides, I don't recall POSIX standard needs to >deal with header files generated from an user specified interface file. >Pls enlight us! >If IETF, TMF, and especially W3C also doing the samething and saying OMG today is writing standards for middleware. So whatever is required >"we are as good as a place as any", do you agree? for the longevity, portability etc. of such softwares, it must take initiative to address that. It may do that in conjunction with other existing bodies, but that is upto it.!! >Now, you start to agree "it is non-trivial"!? It is definitly doable, I think its not trivial. But definitely required for building up a >and has been repeatly independently done for many years, many times, by >many people, in many commercial products and student projects. But, to >"standardize" this be able to meet reasonably generic application needs >is more than to implement it for few specific applications and few >specific platforms. portable and more widely deployable applications. And more for promoting/ popularity of CORBA among user community. And so a concerted effort is required to achieve the same. >See previous post. Also, I don't see other comparable "middleware" You are making me wonder !! Should not middleware provide uniform >technologies "standardized" this. Which one? J2EE and .NET do >standardize their system interfaces. However, they are both (claimed to >be) middlewares, as well as programming environment/platforms. If you >are really ambitious to extend CORBA beyond middleware scope to become >a programming environment/platform as well, you should: programming model as well. CORBA does provides a programming model/ environment only thing is it is limited for its own usage and to an extent it provides some powerful mechanism (Servant Managers for programmers) still it must be enhanced to assist end users or application programmer, specifically portability. And this will definitely help to even tool vendors to develop better >Make it clear in OMG, especially to most members and AB. This is not Here is the list of platforms supported by Visibroker CORBA >a small move. and it should be done top down, starting from an overall >architecture vision, and the foundition hierarchy, rather than bottom >up, starting from a specific system interfaces without knowing whether >and where it would fit in within the final architecture. implementation http://info.borland.com/techpubs/visibroker/platforms/vbj45.html I assume most of the vendors would have already abstracted in their Why and how will it be different than providing (Definitely it will be I mean what is stopping vendors themselves proposing this to OMG. As If not let ACE framework be made as standard. >At least define your system interfaces using IDL, instead of language I think most of big application developers do it. We also do it. Still >specific; it should be addressed by middleware. regards ------------- You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||