From: Timothy Robin BARBOUR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>> "Sigbjorn" == Sigbjorn Finne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Sigbjorn> As part of H/Direct, we're going to support something
> Sigbjorn> similar to JNI for the new Hugs/GHC system, see
>
> Sigbjorn> http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/fp/software/hdirect
> [...]
> Sigbjorn> This document expresses the interface in terms of a
> Sigbjorn> bunch of COM interfaces, but that's just one way of
> Sigbjorn> packaging up the provided API.
>
> What about a CORBA interface. CORBA is an open, vendor-independent
> standard. There is a good open-source ORB, namely omniORB , see
>
> http://www.orl.co.uk/omniORB/omniORB.html
>
> omniORB is CORBA-2.0 and IIOP compliant and is GPL licensed.
>
> The Berlin GUI project (an open-source, CORBA-based, next-generation
> windowing system), see
>
> http://www.berlin-consortium.org/
>
> will use omniORB.
>
> If there were a Haskell CORBA mapping, then Berlin components would be
> accessible from Haskell, and Haskell could be used for scripting
> Berlin components. This would be very helpful in GUI matters.
>
> omniORB could be used as the ORB for a Haskell CORBA mapping. The main
> work would be arranging generation of Haskell stubs and skeletons.
>
> The Haskell Server page claims that one advantage of COM is that it
> "ships for free with windows". This suggests that the existence of a
> genuinely free CORBA ORB has been overlooked.
Yes, and there is another red hering. The Haskell Server
page also says that COM is great, because 90% of all
computers run Windows. However, the important question is,
how many precent of all Haskell users run Windows? I am
pretty sure that most of us use some flavour of Un*x...
I am quite unhappy to see these developments (e.g.,
H/Direct) being based on some proprietary standards, as it
means that they are rather useless to me.
Cheers,
Manuel
