What feature would you like to see most in Ice?

[bernard]

What kind of problems do you have with Visual Studio .NET 2003?

Also the next Ice release (sometimes in February) will support Windows 98.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Claes]

a C# version on MS .NET and Mono .NET is definitely highest on my wish list. Secondly, a UML(XMI) --> Slice mapping.

Claes

[marc]

Originally posted by Claes
a C# version on MS .NET and Mono .NET is definitely highest on my wish list. Secondly, a UML(XMI) --> Slice mapping.

Claes

A C# mapping is currently being written. Expect a first version in about two months.

[Ctaesis]

Did you run into some issues with the C# mapping? There's a post around here with Michi implying that C# would come in the Feburary update. I'm not pushy, really.

[marc]

Originally posted by Ctaesis
Did you run into some issues with the C# mapping? There's a post around here with Michi implying that C# would come in the Feburary update. I'm not pushy, really.

There are several issues with some C# libraries being very buggy, such as the network library. For details, you must wait until Michi is back, he is on travel and will be back at the end of next week.

[rdilipk]

There are several issues with some C# libraries being very buggy, such as the network library

I don't mean to convert this to a C# centric discussion but if its not too much trouble could you (or Michi) please enumerate exactly what kind of issues youare facing with the buggy libraries? We are starting a project where we anticipate heavy network usage. If I could get a heads up, it'd be great.

Furthermore we have direct contact with some Microsoft PM's who work in the C# team. We could even touchbase with them regarding the issues if you guys are interestsed.

If you want to take this discussion offline you could email me at dilipxsl AT lycos DOT com

thanks!

[vukicevic]

Not to derail this any further (but I guess I will somewhat anyway, *cough*), I'd be interested in hearing about the corlib bugs you're running into as well... perhaps Michi could make a new thread when he has time to do so.

[marc]

Let me suggest that you start a new thread for this issue. Michi will respond as soon as he is back from his travels.

[michi]

I just replied in C# implementation issues?

Cheers,

Michi.

[shantanu_k06]

Hi,

I'd love to see these, if possible:

1. Define/document an object serialization standard for ICE (across languages) and implement it for the existing language bindings.

2. New language bindings, such as: (a) Python and (b) a plugin for Mozilla/XUL.

Regards,
Shantanu

[Ctaesis]

Mozilla is a web browser, and XUL is a UI description language right? How would you envision using Ice with them? I'm curious.

[shantanu_k06]

Mozilla, besides being a browser, also hosts an application development framework. Though (I just supposed) it's common to call it as Mozilla/XUL, it is not a technically correct term afterall. I admit.

Instead, it is the XPCOM/XPConnect part of Mozilla using which the existing ICE libraries can be wrapped. XPCOM components can be written with C++, Python or JavaScript. XPConnect uses XPIDL (the interface definition language for XPCOM), which would require a mapping corresponding to Slice. More info on mozilla.org, mozdev.org etc.

Mozilla has been gaining popularity of late and it already does SOAP; I believe it would be nice to see an ICE binding available as this might make enterprise-wide RAD deployment through Mozilla easier. You may like to take a look here, though this is not the only one:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=0...tid=163&tid=95

Regards,
Shantanu

[damingyipai]

Can ICE replace the CORBA at short time? If not, this feature is important.

[michi]

Originally posted by damingyipai
Can ICE replace the CORBA at short time? If not, this feature is important.

Ice can do everything CORBA can do, and more.

Interoperating with CORBA is not really an option because the object models are too different. For example, Ice does not provide unsigned integers, unions, arrays, fixed-point types, and a number of other things. At the same time, Ice adds some things that are missing from CORBA, such as exception inheritance, dictionaries, and facets. And other things are simply different, such as the different scoping rules of IDL and Slice. The resulting mismatch in object models is too large to sensibly bridge the two domains.

As an aside, I have seen many attempts to create interoperability between object models before, such as CORBA-COM, CORBA-DCE, CORBA-GDMO, and others. In all cases, these attempts were failures because the mismatch in object models results in APIs that look like a dog's breakfast and no-one wants to use them.

If you want to interoperate between CORBA and Ice, the best and most effective way is to write a proxy server that speaks Ice on one side and CORBA on the other. It's work, yes, but at least, that way, you are going to get an API that is usable, instead of a complete mess. And there is no reason why you can't link with both Ice and an ORB in the same executable.

Cheers,

Michi.

[damingyipai]

If the ICE support O/R mapping( like ODMG, ODL, OQL in CORBA ), it's better to me.