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-Thread: 103376,4cf50a6d88da66e0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!69.16.177.246.MISMATCH!cyclone03.ams!news.highwinds-media.com!npeersf02.ams!newsfe12.ams2.POSTED!40385e62!not-for-mail From: Per Sandberg User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada in Debian: dropping support for the Distributed Systems Annex References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@WWWSpace.NET NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 06:51:55 UTC Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:54:01 +0200 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1367 Date: 2008-07-29T08:54:01+02:00 List-Id: Yes. I would rephrase it to state SAAB has requested RTI to provide Ada-bindings for NDDS and that is a fairly thin binding (Quite close to OMGs IDL2Ada specefication) However the cost for NDDS is quite high at the moment we are talking about figures in the magnintude of $1000 + runtime per target CPU. However DDS is a very powerfull tool for data distrubution. /Per Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:49:21 GMT, Dr. Adrian Wrigley wrote: > >> In these days of distributed systems and multicore processors, running >> complex applications, you'd think Annex E support would be universal. > > Well, maybe RPC is too heavy-weight, and problematic for heterogenous > systems. It represents a client-server, synchronous (OK, there is APC too), > peer-to-peer, static architecture. Procedural abstraction (RPC) is both > low-level and expensive. Annex E lacks remote objects, remote types, > agents, routing, time synchronization, abstracted networking hardware > support. > >> What's happening here? It doesn't seem to have been used in any >> major application (Air Traffic Control, Baggage Handling etc). >> Obviously ACT isn't recommending it, but why isn't there customer pull? > > For the distributed systems we are designing, we just deploy other > architectures. > > And AdaCore seems to look to the other side too: > > http://www.adacore.com/2007/12/08/working-with-saab-adacore-and-rti-integrates-support-for-ada-with-dds-compliant-real-time-messaging-middleware/ >