> > Of course. Which is why CORBA is about putting STRUCTURE in that stream
> > of random bytes coming over the wire. Why should I have to rewrite my
> > marshalling and demarshalling code every time I want to write a
> > server. read and write are fine. But sometimes I want a
> > structure. Sometimes, my structures aren't laid out like C struct's
> > either. What then? What if I want to send an "object" to you?
>
> Then I need to understand the object anyway. And Corba objects are horribly
> over complex. Any lisp hacker will tell you there is only one type: a list.
But alan, that's the beautiful thing. Given a CORBA object, you can
understand its structure without knowing exactly what the contents
are. You can effectively derive it's prototype just by inspecting it.
The only difference between lisp and a CORBA object in this respect is
that each item in the list is typed so that you have even more info about
what to do with it. :)
-Chris
http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/os/
http://www.nondot.org/MagicStats/
http://korbit.sourceforge.net/
> But alan, that's the beautiful thing. Given a CORBA object, you can
> understand its structure without knowing exactly what the contents
> are. You can effectively derive it's prototype just by inspecting it.
Oh dear this isnt going in is it.
Look I know the prototype of every single lisp transaction - its a list. Period.
I know how to manipulate any data I have and print it, because its a list.
I know how to extend it, because its .. a list.
If I need to put content identification in, well guess what - thats a list
((my_name "Hello") (his_name "Foo"))
and XML is simply lisp done wrong.
Alan