[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: CORBA and IDEs
From:       Kalle Dalheimer <kalle () dalheimer ! hh ! eunet ! de>
Date:       1998-07-30 14:37:50
[Download RAW message or body]

weis@stud.uni-frankfurt.de:
>Hi,
>
>On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, Sirtaj Singh Kang wrote:
>
>> 
>> On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Kurt Granroth wrote:
>> [snip]
>> > Constructing an IDE of individual components that can communicate is
>> > the Right Way(tm) to do this... but I'd be hesitant to use CORBA just
>> > now.
>> 
>> What would you rather use?
>> 
>> There are several ORB implementations out there, each of varying degrees
>> of CORBA compliance, completeness and performance. With careful 
>> programming, ORBs can be changed later (not that this is something _I_
>> would like to do).
>> 
>> This is the second time the CORBA size/performance issue has come up on
>> this list and there are some people who want to write a "simple" ORB. Who
>> is willing to do this? Has any of you guys sat down and done a feasibility
>> study of what is required, how long it will take, and what the actual
>> performance gains will be? How will these performance gains compare to the
>> compile-time space/time speedup of mico when egcs finally implements
>> namespaces?
>> 
>> Torben: at this point it would be great if you could share your insight,
>> since you have already attempted what some people are trying to do all
>> over again.
>
>MICO can handle namespaces since 2.1.1 but egcs does not. Once it does 
>compiling CORBA stuff will get much faster. The other ting is that CORBA 
>header files tend to become large. This means you need RAM in your 
>computer, no fast processor. With 128Mb of RAM I can use KDE, Emacs,
>6 Xterms, KDEHELP, play a game, compile koffice and compile kdebase in
>suitable performance while playing an MP3 in the background.
>
>Since KDE 2.0 will have CORBA which will not be ready in this year I 
>think that 128 MB of RAM are not a too high demand for a developrs 
>machine. I heared that VisualC++ does not run very smooth with less today 
>and without CORBA compiling in the background.

Ooops? I am using VC++ with 48MB, and it is reasonably fast (not at startup,
but compile times). OK, if I have an Oracle running in the background...

Kalle

--
Kalle Dalheimer              Contract programming for Unix
kalle@dalheimer.hh.eunet.de  Technical writing
kalle@kde.org                Technical editing
kalle@oreilly.de             KDE Developer (MFCH)
mdalheimer@acm.org           It's open, it's source, it runs - must be KDE!
	

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]