Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v730)
In-Reply-To: <42C8D7C6.4020202@dekasoft.com.ua>
References: <42C4FFA2.6080502@apache.org> <42C50AFA.20904@gmail.com>
 <42C578AE.6000204@toolazydogs.com> <42C57CB7.9010705@dekasoft.com.ua>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507011329260.5464@saturn.opentools.org>
 <42C5983F.2090408@apache.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507011526200.5464@saturn.opentools.org>
 <67D83C87-3830-4C0D-8DC8-F390084A4A31@iq80.com>
 <42C8D7C6.4020202@dekasoft.com.ua>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <96FD24DB-BC52-4E2D-9F9D-9F1F188E89B4@iq80.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com>
Subject: Re: Questions about CORBA
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 10:04:53 -0700
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org

On Jul 3, 2005, at 11:31 PM, Viacheslav N tararin wrote:

> Dain Sundstrom =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
>
>
>> If it comes down to fixing OpenORB or writing our own ORB, I think =20=

>> writing our own will be faster. OpenORB is quite difficult to =20
>> understand and was written before many modern concepts like IoC =20
>> were introduced. The biggest problem this the current OpenORB =20
>> codebase is that it doesn't properly implement IIOP so it cant =20
>> talk to any other ORBs (and it is difficult to find the code to fix).
>>
>
> Can you provide an example? We using OpenORB for our products about =20=

> 5 years, it properly work with OmniORB at less.

We were using the head version and it could not pass an array of =20
primitive values to another orb.  IIRC, character types were not =20
being marshaled as a wchar marshaled, but it has been a while.

Also, the iiop operation name manger is broken.  If you have an =20
overloaded method with an array type it will generate the wrong =20
operation name.  For example:

     void blah();
     void blah(String[] foo);

-dain