Cameron Laird wrote: > You guys work too hard. I beg to differ. ;-)
> My reaction is this: Mr. Kshepitzki asks for an IPC choice, > says that COM looks like a bit too much, and respondents > start by loading him with even *heavier* technical alternatives, such as > CORBA. Well, my relatively limited experience with COM-related technologies suggests that it can be "a bit too much" in terms of the administrative hassle of declaring interfaces, registering components, and so on. However, if CORBA-related technologies from the late 1990s could manage to work so well with Python that one didn't even need to manually generate the various stubs to access remote services, one would hope that such practices haven't been abandoned in the CORBA systems available for Python today. Looking at some of the omniORB tutorials gives the impression that there's a certain number of magic utterances that need to be included in any given program (either client or server) in order to get the underlying mechanisms up and running, but I think that's to be expected for any kind of distributed system. My point was that in adopting something like CORBA, you might need to tolerate a certain amount of boilerplate code but can then expect various tricky aspects of the communications mechanisms to have been thought through on your behalf, meaning that callbacks and other things just work. Rolling your own solution, on the other hand, can end in a long road discovering what those CORBA people were doing for all those years. I suppose if CORBA is too heavy, there's always PYRO. I can't comment on whether PYRO will be able to do what was requested, however. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
