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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no 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!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Ada in Debian: dropping support for the Distributed Systems Annex
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <g6jpi2$523$1@ccpntc8.in2p3.fr>
 <pan.2008.07.28.17.49.16.424827@linuxchip.demon.co.uk.uk.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:27:30 +0200
Message-ID: <w678u4he2evj.rydrfbic5gnb.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Jul 2008 21:27:31 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: a9e658a6.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=LhaclCo1BZm^Y=RbYBPl4`4IUK<Cl32<a4Fo<]lROoRaFl8W>\BH3YbQ`QB@4YCXalDNcfSJ;bb[eIRnRBaCd<MnRR3l:`A;H2hjYfgf=`RfAd
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1365
Date: 2008-07-28T21:27:31+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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/

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de