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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,1eef1e815cf70416 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.50.197.134 with SMTP id iu6mr3774926igc.1.1338977440947; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 03:10:40 -0700 (PDT) Path: l9ni12647pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Niklas Holsti Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Distributed Systems Annex, data sharing between programs Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:09:34 +0200 Organization: Tidorum Ltd Message-ID: References: <8055acf5-188f-4b34-b4f0-83d70fee54f8@googlegroups.com> <96feb838-e0d3-4d06-abf0-79a8e74b5746@e20g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: individual.net 5D14OfC4PQ4NjRVUzXRnjQz4p5elBOyENjTWV29dl7K+P3iGjbqE296NdTjBwvOZtb Cancel-Lock: sha1:rYI5TCkfNkZXQ1rk/T64yI0KGh4= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 In-Reply-To: <96feb838-e0d3-4d06-abf0-79a8e74b5746@e20g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 2012-06-06T12:09:34+02:00 List-Id: On 12-06-06 09:39 , Maciej Sobczak wrote: > On 5 Cze, 18:02, Adam Beneschan wrote: > >> I still think this would be useful 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 might be reasonable to expect that all programs be written in a common language. > > I'm afraid not even then. My work consists mostly of implementing > middleware solutions for multi-language (mostly C++/Java) systems that > are developed within the same division of a single company. I seem to > see this pattern more and more often, wherever I go. > > Interestingly, even if you focus on programs written by the same > person (you cannot get more control than that, right?), there is still > no guarantee that they will be written in the same language, as > different languages have different features and tradeoffs that justify > their use in different contexts. Java-based GUI displays for Ada-based > backends that are configured by Python-based scripts, all using C++- > based databases? Better get used to that. > > This is what makes single-language-distributed-systems solutions kind > of pointless. The fact that *some* distributed systems are multi-language does not mean that a single-language solution is pointless. Insufficient, perhaps. Multi-language distributed systems tend to be built with language-independent middleware. There is not much to discuss about them, from a language-centered point of view (as in c.l.a.). Language-specific bindings to IDLs come closest. In your experience, are IDLs like CORBA used today? Or just sockets with ad-hoc protocols? -- Niklas Holsti Tidorum Ltd niklas holsti tidorum fi . @ .