[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: ANN: "Interacting with CORBA" article

On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Jason Trenouth wrote:

> But that is beside the point, which is: why did
> IDLScript itself need a new kind of specification process? Why isn't it simply
> another language binding?

I remember that there was considerable discussion about precisely this question
when the RFP was drafted. I didn't follow all the details back then but,
from memory, I think there was a faction who felt that CORBA needed a
scripting language, but that it shouldn't go and favor any specific existing
one. (If you pick Perl, you alienate the Tcl crowd, if you pick Tcl, you
alienate the Python crowd, etc...)

I suspect that, from a vendor's perspective, a single scripting language
is also more attractive than a whole raft of language bindings. At least,
with a single scripting language, there is only one thing to support and
maintain; on the other hand, supporting a binding to Tcl, and another one
to Perl, and another one to Python, etc, requires more work (and
integration with public domain or open source software that may keep
changing independently).

							Cheers,

								Michi.
--
Michi Henning               +61 7 3891 5744
Object Oriented Concepts    +61 4 1118 2700 (mobile)
Suite 4, 904 Stanley St     +61 7 3891 5009 (fax)
East Brisbane 4169          michi@ooc.com.au
AUSTRALIA                   http://www.ooc.com.au/staff/michi-henning.html
Follow-Ups: References: