Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[I R T]

Ada has had concurrency support from the begining.

People are now starting to realise that support for concurrency
and distributed programming is a Good Thing.

Recent languages like Oz/Mozart, Cw ,Erlang have support for this.

Perhaps demonstrating how to write concurrent distributed programs with Ada
might help to create interst.

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[Wes Groleau]

I R T wrote:
> Perhaps demonstrating how to write concurrent distributed programs with Ada
> might help to create interst.

Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
Apparently they think that CORBA is better.

-- 
Wes Groleau
Heroes, Heritage, and History
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau/

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[tmoran]

>Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
  I wrote a simple stub maker tool and system.rpc for Janus distributed
programming without much difficulty.

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[I R T]

Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> writes:

> I R T wrote:
>> Perhaps demonstrating how to write concurrent distributed programs with Ada
>> might help to create interst.
>
> Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
> Apparently they think that CORBA is better.


Oh. :-(

Sorry to hear that.

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[Martin Dowie]

<tmoran@acm.org> wrote in message news:NWoxc.63806$eY2.30198@attbi_s02...
> >Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
>   I wrote a simple stub maker tool and system.rpc for Janus distributed
> programming without much difficulty.

First I've heard of this one - care to share? :-)

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[Laurent Pautet]

Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> writes:

> I R T wrote:
>> Perhaps demonstrating how to write concurrent distributed programs with Ada
>> might help to create interst.
>
> Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
> Apparently they think that CORBA is better.

I am a little bit surprized by such a statement.

--
--  Laurent

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[Warren W. Gay VE3WWG]

I R T wrote:
> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> writes:
>>I R T wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps demonstrating how to write concurrent distributed programs with Ada
>>>might help to create interst.
>>
>>Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
>>Apparently they think that CORBA is better.
> 
> Oh. :-(
> 
> Sorry to hear that.

What gives rise to "apparently they think.."? It is
best not to read too much into impressions. They may
in fact have customer demand for CORBA, but
that doesn't necessarily mean that the distributed
annex has fallen out of favour.

Just my $0.02 ;-)
-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[Nick Roberts]

"Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:pxHxc.28025$8k4.722102@news20.bellglobal.com...

> >>>Perhaps demonstrating how to write concurrent distributed
> >>>programs with Ada might help to create interst.
> >>
> >>Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
> >>Apparently they think that CORBA is better.
> >
> > Oh. :-(
> >
> > Sorry to hear that.
>
> What gives rise to "apparently they think.."? It is
> best not to read too much into impressions. They may
> in fact have customer demand for CORBA, but
> that doesn't necessarily mean that the distributed
> annex has fallen out of favour.

I'm certain that specific customer demand for CORBA is one big reason.

However, be aware that the DSA (Annex E) and CORBA are not direct
alternatives for one another. It is a crucial aspect of CORBA that it
supports programs developed in isolation from one another except for the
interfaces between them (defined, actually or in effect, by OMG IDL); in
particular, multiple programming languages can be used. The DSA requires
that all the partitions of a distributed program are compiled in the same
environment at least to the extent that every partition has a means of
identifying the others it depends on; CORBA has no equivalent requirement.
The DSA requires (but does not specify) a mechanism by which all the
partitions come into execution simultaneously (in effect). CORBA makes
provision (specifying some, but not all of of) for much more flexible
mechanisms, for example supporting the execution of server programs upon
demand. There are many other significant and fundamental differences.

(Incidentally, I intend to support /both/ DSA and CORBA in AdaOS,
eventually.)

-- 
Nick Roberts

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[Wes Groleau]

Laurent Pautet wrote:

> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> writes:
>>Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
>>Apparently they think that CORBA is better.
> 
> I am a little bit surprized by such a statement.

Would have been clearer had I said,
"Apparently the others think that their customers
are more interested in CORBA."

However, I saw a post that hinted one other vendor
supports the distributed annex.

In my previous job, even the most gung-ho Ada fan
thought CORBA was a better choice than Annex E for
distribution, just because (like it or not) we were
being forced to interface with Java and C and even C++

-- 
Wes Groleau
   "Ideas are more powerful than guns,
    We would not let our enemies have guns;
    why should we let them have ideas?"
                                -- Jozef Stalin

Re: Distributed programming, a killer application for ADA ?

[tmoran]

> From: "Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@baesystems.com>
> <tmoran@acm.org> wrote in message news:NWoxc.63806$eY2.30198@attbi_s02...
> > >Nobody but ACT supports the distributed annex
> >   I wrote a simple stub maker tool and system.rpc for Janus distributed
> > programming without much difficulty.
>
> First I've heard of this one - care to share? :-)
   I've posted this to http://www.home.comcast.net/~twmoran
Look near the bottom.  As usual, it's source, free, and no warranty.