[MUD-Dev] OT: DCOM and RMI

[Miroslav Silovic]

Vadim Tkachenko <vadimt at 4cs.com> writes:

> [all below is my personal opinion]
> 
> I guess, all that DCOM vs. CORBA vs. RMI dispute is just yet another
> religious war.
> Please refrain from continuing this already off-topic thread as a flame
> war, but from my experience (I'm almost the only UNIX freak in a company
> which announces itself as a Microsoft Solution Provider) I can state a
> few facts:
> 
> - CORBA is difficult, but understandable. Also, it's not free (the only
> known to me free CORBA implementation is Voyager from
> www.objectspace.com (they also have excellent, though a bit
> heavy-weighted container library, JGL).

There are also ILU, OmniORB, Arache, and MICO. All of these support
C++, ILU also supports multiple languages, including Java. Arachne is
being extended with new language bindings, as well.

> - RMI, as strange as it sounds, is a lot like CORBA, but it feels much
> better in Java environment. The disadvantage (once again, for me) is
> that I've been developing everything (including commercial applications)
> under Linux, which meant much less support for everything commercial
> and/or proprietary (JDK, Netscape with JDK 1.1 support (btw, released at
> December 24)) - you depend on raw implementations - Java is not as
> mature as I want it to be, but mature enough to see it as a great
> opportunity to write a reusable code, thus speeding up the development.

RMI is an extra later on top of CORBA. While this wasn't initial
intention of its writers, it turned out to be politically, as well as
technically the right thing to do.

Perhaps somebody will tackle writing true Java compiler, using gcc
backend (I wouldn't be surprised if egcs team thinks of this). In that
case, Linux tends to get highest level of support, mostly because
that's what large percentage of free software developers has
available.

In that case, I /might/ consider starting to do projects in Java. :)

--
I refuse to use .sig