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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,ff1f0403676a2300 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.66.74.41 with SMTP id q9mr1581282pav.41.1344884392046; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 11:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Path: c10ni111828pbw.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Marc C Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Networking (General/Design) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 11:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <59a307b9-69f9-42a9-a7ec-0a9b712d9433@googlegroups.com> References: <08540a65-8d88-4042-b021-52c49b2e6772@googlegroups.com> <2de69490-cbc2-4f58-af8a-db5bee3fd665@googlegroups.com> <14f67cad-6b56-4c62-acbd-0c9488a4676b@googlegroups.com> <10yohwt5tzu1n.11rwucf3x0mua.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.223.230.200 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1344884385 31949 127.0.0.1 (13 Aug 2012 18:59:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 18:59:45 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <10yohwt5tzu1n.11rwucf3x0mua.dlg@40tude.net> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=134.223.230.200; posting-account=mjE6MAoAAADjsB3NIuKgfHO4u-Elh3cb User-Agent: G2/1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-08-13T11:59:42-07:00 List-Id: On Monday, August 13, 2012 1:28:22 PM UTC-5, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > BTW, did you evaluate the distributed systems Annex vs. this stuff? I am > interested in an opinion, because we are using other technology, so that = I > had no opportunity to evaluate the Annex. Was it too heavy-weight for you= ? Essentially the DSA was ruled out because the systems with which I would be= communicating are very unlikely to be done in Ada. And, while I could supp= ly an Ada-implemented "client" with Languages-Other-Than-Ada bindings to it= , by offering a "native" client that sends, say JSON across ZeroMQ, it remo= ves a source of hesitancy. In fact, just saying "here's a ZeroMQ port, send= me a JSON object with these fields (or an XML doc passing this schema)" an= d let them go off and build it themselves makes the developers happy. They= don't have to depend, then, on *my* API implementation working correctly. In addition, by employing a standard-ish transport medium--ZeroMQ, AMQP for= now--it's much easier to tie in other systems. So long as my system is net= work-accessible, anyone can get to it--they don't need any client code from= me. This therefore enhances interoperability since I supply the only plat= form-dependent piece, and whoever talks to me can be running whatever OS/HW= platform they want. Marc