Re: FYI: Free CORBA 2 ORB - omniORB 2.4.0 is now released.

[Jason Gilbert <jason scott net>]

stephen farrell wrote:
> 
> edgehp@together.net writes:
> 
> > On 26 Jan, Arthur Jerijian wrote:
> > >
> > >        *******  Free CORBA 2 ORB for C++ available now  *******
> 
> If my understanding is correct, the main concern with omniorb is lack
> of support for anything but C++--is that right?

I would say an advantage is that it's supposedly really fast.
I would say another disadvantage is that it isn't fully CORBA 2
compliant
(at least what I read the other day) and it also said on their webpage
that
they weren't really interested in being fully-compliant, but just
implementing
the features they needed.  It also doesn't support some of the other
features
mico does.

I would say the major advantages of mico are that it strives to be fully
compliant and has many more features/services.  Unfortunately, it is
also
only C++.

One general CORBA question though.  How specific are the idlto{lang}
compilers
to certain ORBS.  The way I understand it is that the idl to language
mappings
are defined by OMG.  The idl to language compilers convert the idl using
this
mapping.  So....does this actually tie a idlto{lang} compiler to a
certain
ORB?

jason

-- 
Jason Gilbert | http://www.scott.net/~jason/ | http://www.mantissa.com/

"The total job will be in the software, and we'll be able to write big
fat programs. We can let them run somewhat inefficiently because there
will be so much horsepower that just sits there. The real focus won't
be who can cram it down in, or who can do it in machine language. It
will be on who can define the right user interface and properly
integrate the main packages." -- Bill Gates, PC Magazine 1982