Re: [boost] CORBA iimplementation for Boost interest?

From: Jonathan Biggar (jon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-01 19:59:17

vicente.botet wrote:
> 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++ 
> techniques?

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 
anymore either.

-- 
Jon Biggar
Floorboard Software
jon_at_[hidden]
jon_at_[hidden]