From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: Barriers to Lisp acceptance - a "survey" question Date: 1999/03/02 Message-ID: <3129400264626689@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 450509963 References: <7att2h$fpm$1@spitting-spider.aracnet.com> <7auptr$o7a$1@spitting-spider.aracnet.com> <920143667.2037628542@news.mindspring.com> <87ww12uqjh.fsf@2xtreme.net> <920305489.375875724@news.mindspring.com> mail-copies-to: never Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * Kent M Pitman | (Of course, you probably find out by latency or net protection errors, | but no equivalent system not based on CORBA does any better.) dealing with networking problems is so complex that an application really cannot afford to trust a pre-packaged solution that does not give very good access to the error conditions. I've spent hundreds of hours giving Allegro CL's socket package and my protocol on top of it graceful failure modes. it's really hard work. judging from what I see from people who just use some random pre-packaged library, this is not an area that people tend to worry about, hence we get very dangerous solutions that work in a perfect world, but not in the hostile world we actually live in. what little I know about CORBA has not shown me a condition system that is capable of what I need from a basically unreliable universe where your application no longers dies when the machine dies, it may get wedged in some zombie state when some machine you didn't know about dies, like a router, a firewall, or simply someone messing up routing tables, etc. stuff like happens all the more often the more you are interconnected, and a distributed object system is no good if it doesn't deal with such problems gracefully, in my opinion. #:Erik