From: Jonathan Biggar (jon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-01 19:59:17
> I think that a C++ CORBA implementation is a big deal. In addition a corba
> implemenation is not very useful without a minimal set of CORBA services.
Yes, it's a big deal. I've been working on this for a *very* long time
on my own.
> Are you mapping idl files to C++ using a generator?
Yes, I have an IDL compiler.
> Do you use the standard C++ mapping, or a mapping using more generic C++
It's the standard mapping for now, but the underlying engine could be
used underneath a new experimental mapping.
> Could you present your current implementation, OS, middleware, ...
Runs on UNIX (Solaris), Linux and Windows NT or later.
> Could you present a little bit your project, contents, architecture, ...
Here's the basics of what I've got:
1. An IDL compiler, currently mostly written in Perl, but I've been
thinking about rewriting it using Wave and Spirit.
2. An ORB library to link with. This includes a pretty much complete
implementation of CORBA 2.6, including the C++ binding, GIOP/IIOP
implementation, valuetypes and abstract interfaces, the Dynamic
Invocation and Skeleton interfaces, and almost all of the CORBA
messaging specification (async and polling invocations and the policy
framework). I have a partial implementation of portable interceptors.
3. Naming service and a simplistic implementation launching service.
> Do you have everything you need already in Boost?
With ASIO and the newer Thread library, I think I have everything I need
for the ORB library. I have been using ACE up till now. (I actually
started this project long before the ACE team started TAO.) If I
rewrite the IDL compiler in Wave and Spirit, then I won't need Perl
-- Jon Biggar Floorboard Software jon_at_[hidden] jon_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk