From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-01 23:20:16
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Jonathan Biggar <jon_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Well, you can feel that way, but that rather chops my proposal out
Doesn't have to be CORBA. Just OO middleware that's "inspired" by CORBA.
> I think you're giving CORBA a bad rap.
This is of course my personal opinion, but I think it deserves the rap that
it gets. People stopped using it because it was too complicated (too hard
to find good CORBA developers) and clunky.
> Yes there are klunky parts of
> the standard (contexts, anyone?), but if you ignore them and redesign
> the C++ binding, what's left is quite workable.
I'd redo even the NamingService spec.
> And I think the chances of standardizing a CORBA replacement that is
> multi-language and multi-platform is pretty much nil.
I've never tried to push anything through a standardization process, and
have no idea how difficult this is. Of course, do you really need to
standardize an OO middleware product that kicks enough butt to become a de
My gut feeling is that changing CORBA in any but superficial ways will be
impossible. Then you're stuck w/ Jonathan's ORB. Maybe that's not a Bad
Incidentally, have you looked at ICE?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk