Wed, 7 Jun 2000 07:47:26 -0700
From: Bob Leif
To: Wesley Groleau et al.
I believe that CORBA is not going to be the ultimate winner. However with
Ada you, can have your cake and eat it too. We create a Web compliant
version of DCE that where possible employs CORBA data types and Annex E.
This would include XML_IO. This DCE in Ada would interface with both CORBA
and Annex E.
I have been looking at a similar problem with DICOM, Digital Imaging and
Communications in Medicine. My solution is to reuse the DICOM data types and
relevant methods in XML by creating an XML Document Type Definition, DTD.
Fortunately, DTD semantics are close to Ada. DTD data types include ranges.
I might note that I believe that the DCE project should be a for profit
enterprise. The best method to sell Ada is to demonstrate that it can make
one into a multimillionaire.
From: Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of W. Wesley Groleau x4923
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 7:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: DCE is the killer app for open source Ada?
> I have been snooping around for info on my earlier proposal on DCE. I
> found a paper on the issue,
> quite interesting reading actually.
See also http://www,mitre.org/research/domis/reports/DCEvCORBA.html To
oversimplify, CORBA is better for Object-Oriented work, and has some
low-level capabilities that DCE lacks. However, DCE has more high-level
capabilities (distributed file system, for example).
An Ada implementation, using CORBA, of some significant DCE subsystem
might be another big "seller."
It would also be nice if more Ada compilers validated Annex E. I know of
at least one vendor who has stated to at least one customer that since
CORBA, the Ada Annex E is superfluous and they won't waste money on it.
Similarly, I know of Ada programmers that say Annex E is useless because
it's Ada-only, and one-language systems are a thing of the past.
What about an ASIS tool that creates CORBA IDL from Annex E package
specs? Or non-Ada bindings to Ada specs? (Instead of the reverse).