Re: Is CORBA dead for Ada

["Stephane Richard" <stephane.richard@verizon.net>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1574 bytes --]


"Nick Roberts" <nick.roberts@acm.org> wrote in message
news:bn20as$rl85q$1@ID-25716.news.uni-berlin.de...

> So would I, but the DSA as it currently stands is suitable only for
> embedded systems (it has no reflection, security, transaction management,
> publication, and so on), and the ARG seems to be very reluctant to expand
> the DSA's role (or separately extend it).

*** I wonder why.  would be like saying let's not do an X-Windows binding
because there's already a Windows binding done?  Maybe they dont see it as
an oposing force to CORBA.  It should be.  Sure CORBA is good, but so is the
DSA and at the state where it is, because it doesn't have all these things
you mention, it's the perfect oppurtunity to elaborate it in a given
direction :-).
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if the Ada team are waiting for an indication of
> how the mutual type reference problem is going to be solved in the new
> revision of Ada before undertaking any major review of the Ada binding.
>
*** For this I'm not sure, I'm not part of the Ada team ;-)....yet...but the
problem is there and if not anything else should be resolved.  It's a very
concrete problem and should be fixable somehow :-).

> Nevertheless, I'm inclined to investigate this issue if I can.
>
*** So am I and I will too ;-).  perhaps we can exchange notes?

By the way, it's good to see a post from you Nick, been a while since I've
seen you posting (maybe I just dont read the newsgroups often enough ;-).

> -- 
> Nick Roberts
>
>


-- 
St�phane Richard
"Ada World" Webmaster
http://www.adaworld.com