From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,dbc63810b4ca3da5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-20 18:28:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!cycny01.gnilink.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny01.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Stephane Richard" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <0jXkb.6405$Vf7.4912@nwrdny02.gnilink.net> Subject: Re: Is CORBA dead for Ada X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: <0Z%kb.8135$Fc5.3932@nwrdny01.gnilink.net> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 01:28:28 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.149.82.27 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrdny01.gnilink.net 1066699708 141.149.82.27 (Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:28:28 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:28:28 EDT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1239 Date: 2003-10-21T01:28:28+00:00 List-Id: "Nick Roberts" 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