Re: PolyORB 1.1r

[Laurent Pautet <pautet@dorine.enst.fr>]

"Dr. Adrian Wrigley" <amtw@linuxchip.demon.co.uk.uk.uk> writes:

> Can I take an existing Annex E/Glade program and recompile it
> with PolyORB? (no modifications needed?)  Is there a porting guide?

The answer is "yes" an existing Annex E/Glade program works with
GNAT/DSA/PolyORB (we pass ACATS for instance) and "no" you cannot port
it yourself because you need the patch to GNAT to produce code for
PolyORB (and not for GARLIC which is the GLADE ORB).

> Is this intended to supersede Glade?  Does it do everything
> Glade could do, only better?  Is PolyORB/DSA suitable in
> a "production" system where high reliability is wanted?

Yes. It may be integrated in 5.03. Not sure about that.

> How does it compare with Glade in terms of speed, complexity, code size,
> robustness etc?

Almost the same with much more features. For instance, you can make a
CORBA program and a DSA program interoperate.

Note that PolyORB is also a research project. That is why there are
public releases (p) and research releases (r). The customer and public
releases are intensively tested on many platforms. There is a strong
commitment from AdaCore to support these releases. A research release
is a stable snapshot tested on a bunch of platforms. Its main goal is
to help people to contribute to this research work. But AdaCore does
not support these specific releases (as the testing activity is much
lighter).

> I currently use Glade, but have been unable to fix a couple of
> problems with the implementation, and there don't seem to be
> any versions beyond 3.15 on the horizon.

This is another point. There has been no public release of GLADE for a
long time. But there are professional releases for 3.16 and 5.02.

The good news is that the GLADE CVS tree may become soon available. I
hope to have a GO before Ada-Europe 2004. So very soon ... Stay tuned!

Thank you for patience,

--
--  Laurent