[omniORB] VisiBroker x Omni: Modules and Tie implementations

[Philippe de M. Sevestre]

Hi,

I'm developing an online banking application unsing both omniORB (3.x) and
VisiBroker C++ (4.0) (please don't ask the reasoning behind this...) and
there are porting issues from one ORB to the other that look bit odd. From
these issues, the idl compiler names generated for tie implementations is
the one the most intrigating for me. It goes like this:

Given the following IDL:

module A {

	interface A1 {

		....
	};

};

module B {
	interface B1 : public A::A1 {
		....
	};
};


For omniORB, one can declare use the generated tie for I_B like that:

POA_B::B1_tie< B1_implementation> myB1;


Using VisiBroker, myI_B must be declared as:

POA_B1_B_tie< B1_implementation> myB1;


OmniORB's way makes more sense to me, but, reading the specs, I couldn't
find a good reason that would support an statement saying that VB is wrong.

My code now is using a lot of typedef's, but I think that the whole point
of using POAs would be the 'P' on it, right ? Anyone has a similar
experience with this kind os cross-orb problems ?


TYA,

Philippe.