The Component Object Model (COM) is (or was...) the way in Windows to provide language-neutral software components.
Is there any programming model in Linux/UNIX with the same philosophy of code reuse through binary components?
Asked
Active
Viewed 1,547 times
3 Answers
16
Sun RPC was supposed to be that. Then there was CORBA. Then GNOME Bonobo and KDE DCOP. Now it looks like D-Bus is latest fashion.
Nikolai Fetissov
- 82,306
- 11
- 110
- 171
-
Yes, seems DBUS is the way to go. Thankz. – Hernán May 26 '10 at 04:58
-
Ah! What about XPCOM? It's too much restricted to programming for Mozilla projects? Or it's COM-like? – Hernán May 26 '10 at 05:28
-
About XPCOM, it is not that easy to use apart from Mozilla. Also, don't forget Uno, the counerpart for OpenOffice/LibreOffice. – Diego Sevilla Nov 23 '10 at 17:04
-
DBUS is not a component system. It just provides IPC (inter-process communication) and activation (doing IPC with a process that is not started yet). It does not support in-process components (like loadable libraries or ActiveX controls), nor does it have many standardized interfaces (a la "embeddable control", "file viewer for file type XY", IDispatch, persistant storage, OLE, ... like you have in COM). Basically, nowadays (2012) all of this is replaced by one-off DBUS interfaces. – jdm Sep 12 '12 at 22:25
5
On Linux, DBus is currently in the process of becoming the de-facto higher-level standard.
Georg Fritzsche
- 97,545
- 26
- 194
- 236
2
The Evolution email client as part of GNOME uses CORBA. It uses ORBit which is a lightweight CORBA ORB.
Eddy Pronk
- 6,527
- 5
- 33
- 57