From ... Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!129.240.148.23!uio.no!Norway.EU.net!127.0.0.1!nobody From: Erik Naggum Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: corba or sockets? Date: 01 Nov 2000 13:47:01 +0000 Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 800 35477; gsm: +47 93 256 360; fax: +47 93 270 868; http://naggum.no; http://naggum.net Lines: 60 Message-ID: <3182075221642184@naggum.net> References: <3181895804626114@naggum.net> <6xitq9fijb.fsf@lant.be> <6xy9z5do78.fsf@lant.be> <3182017393789471@naggum.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 973091149 17659 195.0.192.66 (1 Nov 2000 15:05:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Nov 2000 15:05:49 GMT mail-copies-to: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.7 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.lisp:3038 * Erik Naggum | ... you might decide not to "know" where your objects are. This | could lead to all _kinds_ of interesting performance pessimizations, | just one of which is CORBA. I thought this was an obvious tongue-in-cheek comment. * Philip Lijnzaad | Are you suggesting that there is a performance bottleneck in that | you have to know where (host,port or so) they are in order to use | CORBA objects? No, I am "suggesting" that if you make a decision not to know the location of your objects, you open up for a number of ways to waste time and resources, relative to knowing where they are, obviously. You are most probably not arguing that there is _no_ performance cost in using COBRA compared to a direct in-memory object reference, so I am a little uncertain what you are actually thinking of and responding to. | Some of the critcism that I see raised against CORBA derive from the | fact that people don't appreciate the kinds of things that CORBA | solves. That could also be true, but in my case, I do not care for the kinds of things COBRA does to accomplish what it does solve. I don't have anything against what CORBA tries to solve, which is all very smart and very good and all that. | When you look closely at it, no other technology (cgi, RMI, SOAP, | DCOM) comes close to offering its functionality. This looks like marketing to me, with fairly automatic responses, and I have to reopen my ears to continue to read what you're saying. | Just to be explicit about this: | | - language independence | - platform/vendor independence | - location independence | - network protocol independence | - separation of 'distributed objects' from their implementations | - security model | - location forwarding | - on-demand launching of servers | - fault-tolerance capabilities | - async messaging | - footprint | - performance | | and there's prolly a few things I overlooked. Thanks for the list of features. Do you see a list of misfeatures or at least problems that would impel someone _not_ to use CORBA if they wanted some of these features? #:Erik -- Does anyone remember where I parked Air Force One? -- George W. Bush