From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Homo or hetero
Date: 2000/03/01
Date: 2000-03-01T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <89i5vb$tqp$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 89fol9$6nr$1@nnrp1.deja.com
In article <89fol9$6nr$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Oliver Kellogg <okellogg@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Okay, I guess those spoiled by the joys of CORBA could call
> the addressing of heterogeneousness by the DSA "unimportant"
> :-)
Sorry, I am still completely confused. I know there is a smiley
there, but what possible effect can it have on the use of the
DSA whether you decide to call this situation homogenous or
heterogenous? Sure you have to check that your vendor's
implementation of Annex E will handle this combination, but
since so far the only implementation of Annex E is GNAT, and
GNAT handles heterogenous cases as easily as homogenous cases,
even if the architectures involved are very different (unlike
this case), that observation is academic!
Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-03-01 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-02-22 0:00 Homo or hetero Daniel Wengelin
2000-02-28 0:00 ` Oliver Kellogg
2000-02-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-02-29 0:00 ` Oliver Kellogg
2000-03-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-03-01 0:00 homo " Oliver Kellogg
2000-03-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox