Which CORBA binding ?

[Tres Seaver]

In article <38d5fee8 at nntp.server.uni-frankfurt.de>,
 <mlauer at trollinger-fe.rz.uni-frankfurt.de> wrote:
>Hi. Thanks for the quick answer.
>
>> Well, you can get some work done with ORBit-python. Bugs are being
>> shaken out at a fast rate. But it doesn't use the CORBA standard for Python
>> bindings.
>
>What problems could arise of this ?

You lose portability between ORBs -- Fnorb, omniORBpy, and ILU all do/will
use the same mapping, so moving code among them is fairly straighforward.

>
>> It isn't able to compile IDL to stubs and skeletons, but
>> imports it on the fly. This is quite fast, and does away with the need
>> to locate the stubs and skeletons, but it can obviously be a
>> bottleneck in some applications.
>
>Agreed, but for me it sounds like a great feature.

Without generated stubs/skeletons, you can't:

 * Peer into the internals to figure out why something isn't working;

 * (Easily) derive custom versions to extend/override the generated
   behavior.
>
>> pyOrbit isn't able to compile IDL yet. You have to handcraft Python
>> stubs and skeletons around the C versions. 
>
>Ok, then ORBit-python sounds better for me.
>
>> Are you interested in CORBA/Python in general or just for the GNOME
>> environment?
>
>in general. I've done some stuff in c++ with MICO (http://www.mico.org)
>which now shall work together with some python clients and servers.

Unless you are already committed to ORBit, I would recommend looking at
one of the other Python ORBs (Fnorb/omniORBpy/ILU)  -- nothing agains ORBit,
but there has been a *lot* of good work done *in Python* with those three.

Tres.
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tres Seaver           tseaver at palladion.com       713-523-6582
Palladion Software    http://www.palladion.com