[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MIG->Corba

From: Mridul Jain
Subject: Re: MIG->Corba
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 22:39:38 -0800 (PST)


> Please take my comments lightly, they are meant to
> be humorous to
> an extent. [no flames intended]

Hey things are cool!!It's just a useful discussion.:-)
> So, you're saying that a well optimized ORB can be
> just as good as MIG.
> That raises two other questions:
>   1) Is CORBA going to be as slow as MIG?
>   2) Is MIG slow enough?

I think Markus has explained this pretty well.
> For instance, do you really need to write hurd
> servers in different languages?

I am sure that people would like to code in various
languages.I like c,c++ but think Lisp is great and
would like to work on it in future.May be others will
like their favourite and comfortable language too.That
attracts a varity of programmers and contributors.

> Even companies who are so involved with political
> statements (sun/ms) don't
> try to do that (corba or xml) at the kernel level

Do you think they even provide anything as close to
HURD servers etc in the user-mode??I think that HURD
servers running in the user-space itself is a great
opportunity for programmers. 

> In fact, I wouldn't do it if it wouldn't make any
> major improvement over
> MIG.

I think it will have quite major improvements over MIG
as we have been discussing in earlier mails.
> But on the other hand, perhaps what you're thinking
> of accomplishing through
> making CORBA available is taking advantage of object
> oriented development.

Yes that fits in well with the modularized
architecture  of GNUOS ,but this is only one of the
good reasons.There are may more things than using
Corba just for OOPs.

> how easier will it make the life of a HURD developer
> instead of how buzzword
> compliant it will be.
Going the MIG/IPC way is easy ...but we have to see if
we get something better which IIOP can provide.
I am not going gaga over IIOP as it appears to be a
buzzword but because the advantages are many.
If we have something better I am open to that too.

I don't think IIOP or GIOP are buzzwords!!Just imagine
the flexibility they provide!!!!Almost everyone is
trying to be OMG compliant.It helps to get rid of
protocol incompatibilities.People again needn't be
restricted to just IPC.They can use any GIOP compliant
protocol to talk to a piece of code especially on the
net which is also GIOP compliant but may use a
different protocol.ESIOP takes it a step further.I
think you should read the excellent link given by
Markus about IIOP/GIOP/ESIOP :


What I see in Corba is the power to provide
flexibility whether for different languages or
protocols etc which is a big boon to programmers. 


Inspired by GNU

Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]