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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,1eef1e815cf70416 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.219.170 with SMTP id pp10mr14029303pbc.1.1338912247308; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 09:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Path: l9ni7355pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Distributed Systems Annex, data sharing between programs Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 09:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <8055acf5-188f-4b34-b4f0-83d70fee54f8@googlegroups.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1338912247 32640 127.0.0.1 (5 Jun 2012 16:04:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:04:07 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-06-05T09:02:30-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, June 5, 2012 12:36:01 AM UTC-7, Maciej Sobczak wrote: > > If my understanding is correct, my next question is: is there any langu= age-defined support for sharing data between programs >=20 > Do you expect it to be language-defined? Why? Ada is not the only > language (not even the only ISO-stamped one) and heterogeneity is a > natural property of systems composed of multiple programs. Defining > data sharing between programs written in the same language would be a > wasted effort (better spent elsewhere in the standard). Instead, allow > others (third-parties) to define it so that programs written in > different languages will be able to share data - this will have much > bigger benefits. My reasoning here is that the DSA requires mechanisms to pass objects of Ad= a types between partitions (of the same program?) transparently, and also t= o share data in Shared_Passive partitions transparently, without users havi= ng to worry about the representation. So it would seem like a natural exte= nsion to provide this sort of communication between "programs". The mechan= isms would already exist. On the other hand, you have a point that writing= a server that uses a feature like this would limit the programs that could= use the service to those written in Ada. I still think this would be usef= ul in some situations--for example, if the server and clients were expected= to be used within one company (or one division of a company), so that it m= ight be reasonable to expect that all programs be written in a common langu= age. -- Adam