distributed computing implementations

[Irmen de Jong]

Jp Calderone wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:25:20AM -0700, Andrew Dalke wrote:
> 
>>robin:
>>
>>>If you want the biggest, boldest approach and don't care about
>>>overhead, use CORBA.
>>
>>What overhead would this be?  From what I see of omniORB,
>>there isn't really that much.  Also, CORBA is the most complete,
>>eg, it allows callbacks and passing around object references
>>the others don't have.
>>
> 
> 
>   I'm not sure about XML-RPC, SOAP, or Dopy, but I know Twisted Spread can
> pass references around like this (and you can tell it just -how- you want
> them passed), and I think Pyro can too.

Certainly. You can pass around the actual Pyro proxy objects, without 
bothering about object location, ID, etc, or pass around the object's UID.

Pyro also allows callbacks, although you have to do a little bit of extra 
coding to enable them.


>>I've wanted to do something in CORBA for years.  I've
>>never gotten there.  One problem is that I'm used to Python,
>>where I don't need to describe the interface beforhand.
>>CORBA wants that IDL, and a change in the object's interface
>> must be reflected in the IDL.  That just seems tedious to
>>me now.
>>
> 
> 
>   Right.  I think this is at least part of the overhead Robin was talking
> about.  Several of the other schemes don't require this.

> 
> 
>>I also do nearly everything in Python, so don't need the
>>ability for different langauges to interoperate.  I just pass
>>around Python objects.

I'd say: use Pyro (but I'm biased ofcourse ;=)
You won't have to specify an interface other than your regular
Python class, and it's designed for a Python-only environment.

--Irmen de Jong.