Re: Ada-Python demo

[Peter Brooks <peter.h.m.brooks@gmail.com>]

On Saturday, 13 July 2013 23:06:31 UTC+2, Maciej Sobczak  wrote:
> > What I found optimal was writing the "engine" in Ada, with a PyGtk-based Python GUI (built with GLADE). Then I used JSON over ZeroMQ to communicate between the two processes
> 
> > 
> 
> > Minimum pain, and maximum productivity.
> 
> 
> 
> Heck, I cannot agree with this. Both JSON and ZeroMQ is just low-level mess.
> 
> You might want to read this:
> 
> http://www.inspirel.com/articles/YAMI4_vs_ZeroMQ.html
> 
This is interesting - I should have read this before posting my other question..

However, reading the article, it looks as if YAM14 uses its own data model language that isn't translatable into any ontology language - which seems a major problem.

Surely a communication language like this ought first to be defined in an ontology?
> 
> 
> I also find it disturbing that you consider JSON to be appropriate on the Ada side. What about this:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.inspirel.com/yami4/book/10.html
> 
> http://www.inspirel.com/yami4/book/10-2.html
> 
> http://www.inspirel.com/yami4/book/10-4-1.html
> 
> 
> 
> YAMI4 allows you to write your next (!) distributed system without sacrificing the advantages of Ada. Integration with the Ada tasking model and type safety are features that you should be asking for.
> 
There's a lot of wheel re-inventing here. The advantage of using an ontology is that all the mappings are defined independent of language, so should be easy to port into any language that can interpret ontologies without the need for specific, error-prone interfaces for each language.