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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dbc63810b4ca3da5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-20 17:58:05 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!82-43-33-75.cable.ubr01.croy.blueyonder.co.UK!not-for-mail
From: Nick Roberts <nick.roberts@acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is CORBA dead for Ada
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 01:58:02 +0100
Message-ID: <bn20as$rl85q$1@ID-25716.news.uni-berlin.de>
References: <bn145s$1kbk$1@avanie.enst.fr> <uwuazlngh.fsf@nasa.gov>
 <0jXkb.6405$Vf7.4912@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82-43-33-75.cable.ubr01.croy.blueyonder.co.uk (82.43.33.75)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1066697884 29008058 82.43.33.75 (16 [25716])
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US;
 rv:1.5) Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
In-Reply-To: <0jXkb.6405$Vf7.4912@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1236
Date: 2003-10-21T01:58:02+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Stephane Richard wrote:

> indeed, CORBA 2.6 that I read from his message ;-)....but I couldn't say if
> there's anything later than that.  CORBA and the Ada DSA are both for
> distributed systems so I would much rather see the DSA pushed further. as an
> "opposing force" to CORBA :-).  but that's just me.

So would I, but the DSA as it currently stands is suitable only for
embedded systems (it has no reflection, security, transaction management,
publication, and so on), and the ARG seems to be very reluctant to expand
the DSA's role (or separately extend it).

> I couldn't tell you teh discrepencies between 2.3 and 2.6. Wouldn't major
> changes in inner structures and such be better suited for Corba 3.0 instead
> of 2.6 ?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Ada team are waiting for an indication of
how the mutual type reference problem is going to be solved in the new
revision of Ada before undertaking any major review of the Ada binding.

Nevertheless, I'm inclined to investigate this issue if I can.

-- 
Nick Roberts