> You are aware, aren't you, that Mico has no support whatsoever for
> interfacing to C code? If PostgreSQL will base it's preliminary
> support on
> Mico, then all the interface development will have to be done twice: once
> in C, and then a C++ wrapper to mediate between PostgreSQL and Mico.
Have you tried 'idl --no-codegen-c++ --codegen-c'? It doesn't yet support
arrays, sequences, and a few others, but it's there :)
> >By starting the development off using mico as a basis, we are
> implementing a
> >2.2 model using a 'generic hook' method such that allowing ppl to use
> >ORBit or OMNIorb or any other implementation will be simply a matter of
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >modifying one central include file to map between libraries, as
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >required...once the others catch up to mico...
>
> I would recommend you look more closely into the role language
> mappings play
> in the CORBA architecture, versus the role played by Inter-Orb bridges.
Yes, it looks like eventually the ENTIRE backend will have to be written to
support CORBA directly, especially if we want to be COSS-compliant. See my
IDL postings for details.
Taral
