Re: GNOME & KOM/OP

[Miguel de Icaza <miguel nuclecu unam mx>]

>     (1)Are you trying to  build COM ("GOM"? ;-) _on top_ of Corba? What
> would be the benifit over *just* using Corba?

More or less yes.

We get the best of both worlds:

	- We get CORBA's automation for free.

	- There are lots of COM books and resources available and it
	  is very simple to use. 

> So, I guess you mean option (1), GOM on top of Corba, this would still give
> "philosophic" problems combining the COM & Corba models. 

We are figuring those out, dont worry.

> So maybe it would be better to take the already lightweight Orbit
> Corba implementation, and define a subset optimized for local
> communications (like COM), that allows local component
> communications to be even thinner.

That has been the plan all of the time.  Check the orbit-list for
details.

> If you really want to reimplement COM, please do avoid some of the MS
> mistakes (you know, the inheritance vs aggregation stuff etc.). See
> http://www.relisoft.com/win32/olerant.html for some more details.

I read the document you mention.  

The author just had a narrow view on the issues being addressed by
COM like language independence, remote objects and automation.  He is
just whining because he found it hard because a lack of background. 

cheers,
Miguel.