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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,682d1c4a13fb8d32 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!p6g2000vbj.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: DDS and Ada Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:24:21 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <2011070520341767939-martynatemconukdotcom@news-europe.giganews.com> <486fcdd0-f21d-401c-9bd5-670c7e6d96c0@g16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <2011070620273884195-martynatemconukdotcom@news-europe.giganews.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.3.40.82 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1309988978 28892 127.0.0.1 (6 Jul 2011 21:49:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:49:38 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: p6g2000vbj.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.3.40.82; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20108 Date: 2011-07-06T14:24:21-07:00 List-Id: On Jul 6, 9:27=A0pm, Martyn Pike wrote: > My interest is in the wider scope but specifically the interoperability > of different solutions. > I understand that different CORBA ORBs can talk to eachother but I am > less convinced > different DDS implementations can talk to eachother. Not necessarily. If they can, their vendors make a big marketing hoopla about it, which means that it is not expected out of the box. In particular, I do not expect broker-based DDS to interoperate with a broker-less DDS without any additional gateway/bridge on the way. >=A0So a C++ DDS > publisher and an > Ada DDS subscriber as per the spec is what I am looking for. Then probably the best choice is to find a vendor who has a single product with several language bindings. May I ask you why do you insist on DDS, specifically? Is it mandated by some higher authority or is it some very special feature/ requirement that can only be possibly met by a DDS implementation? -- Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com