[xmlblaster-devel] Re: [xmlblaster] Bugging me.

[Marcel Ruff <ruff at swand.lake.de>]

Martin Johnson wrote:

> > > I have the 2 or so small changes to make for the memory leaks and such,
> > > though I was wondering if it would be OK to add TAO support, in a similar
> > > manner that you have for done so for mico and orbacus to the c++ code in
> > > xmlBlaster/src/c++/client and xmlBlaster/src/c++/utils I could even have
> > >      
> a
>  
>
> > > go at the tao.xml files for ant builds.
> > >
> > >      
> > Great, this contribution would be very welcome.
> > I know of a car radar application where in the cars are running
> > TAO-C++ applications on Windows and in the center there
> > is running xmlBlaster with JacORB. What i heared it is currently running
> > without problems (related to MoM).
> > I don't know exactly how they integrated our C++ code with their
> > TAO stuff - i think they did some own hacks. They
> > never cleaned it up to donate it back to xmlBlaster.org.
> > I've done a BCC: to them as well, probably they are interested
> > in integrating.
> >    
>
> Sorry to not get back to you sooner,
> Getting TAO to work with jacorb is a piece of cake, they work well together
> (no hacks), the hardest thing has been getting a blaster client building as
> a dll, (to date I have only done as a static lib) this has been most the
> interesting (idl compiler switches, building xerces dll, the pre-built only
> appears to come as a static lib). Anyway I have a xmlBlasterClient.dll
> building and running, at the moment I have what appears to be a leak from
> the sequence<string> returning from update so I'm just chasing that down at
> the moment. I'm working with the latest TAO beta and I'm not sure who is
> responsible just yet. I will concentrate try to have this sorted by the end
> of the week.
Ahh, it would be great if you could add your Windows C++ compiler settings
to our build.xml file, once i had access to a windows box and tried to 
compile
the xmlBlaster C++ clients on Windows but i gave up after one evening as
i couldn't find out how to plug all those dll's together - the major 
problem was
(if i remember right) that some libs where compiled multi-threaded and some
not so it didn't want to link (i could build all dlls but was not able 
to link then).
My goal was to have everything multi-threaded
but i was not patient enough ---

> > If there are questions or improvement ideas about different ORB support
> > in our lib, Michele is the right person as he developed the current
> > implementation.
> >    
>
> At the moment I have aimed for a dll build first as the doco alluded to the
> existing implemenation building as a dll, though I could find no evidence of
> it (I'm no makefile guru) but it all looked like a .so build to me.
The makefiles won't work on Windows, try somthing like

build.bat  -Ddebug=on   cpp-lib

than you need to play with puild.properties and build.xml
(i have never tried this with ant on Windows - but it should
be possible).

> The C++ code compiles well with our build.xml (ant) on Linux,
> i have not tried on other platforms yet.
> But ant is the way to go even for C++/C as we will kick off the
> Makefiles one day.
>  
>
>
> Cool

Oliver Fels told me that he is writing a tiny C lib which uses
our SOCKET protocol to access xmlBlaster from C and allowing
tunneling of firewalls etc. He needs it for handhelds and other
strange things.

Possibly it would be nice to allow using our C++ code to use
lowlevel the SOCKET C-lib one day in future - this way
C++ clients would use xerces and STL and www.boost.org Threadlib
and other nice C++ libs but can choose lowlevel between CORBA or
SOCKET.

I write this just to inform you or if it is of interest for you,

kind regards,

Marcel