RE: Shipping Vera with 2.4


> > Onthe other hand, language binding to a large variety of 
> > languages for CORBA exist now
> Well, specifications for language mappings exists, but each ORB needs its
> own implementation. Because GNOME chose to write its own ORB (ORBit) there
> are still very few language bindings for it. In fact I don't think there are
> any that are complete or stable, and the complication of CORBA means that
> it's unlikely that they will be finished any time soon.

I think you are confused.  You do not need to use ORBit to talk to an
ORBit server.  That is the point of over-the-wire-protocol IIOP with CDR
(or whatever the name is).

> Personally I do wish we could use CORBA for all IPC but I recognise these
> practical problems:
> - CORBA in C is ridiculously difficult. GNOME uses C.

You do not have to use CORBA from C, nor do you have to use the ORBit C
binding.  If you just want to call a few messages here and there, use
the low-level transport API that ORBit exposes.  Michael can talk more
about this than I can.

> - ORBit2, being a new ORB, has no other usable language bindings,
> particularly no complete C++ bindings for use by KDE.

You do not need to use ORBit2 to talk to an event/bus service that we
would have.   You can use any existing implementation.  

You do not need Bonobo at all. 


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