[jcifs] Re: Tridge's PIDL compiler and the Samba4 IDLs.

Eric Glass eric.glass at gmail.com
Fri Aug 13 00:32:11 GMT 2004

> Second, Jarapac/idlc is a generic toolchain. We are not just interested in
> Windows management functions. I want people with MS-RPC and DCE projects
> to be able integrate Java easily.  I want high-compatibility so that it
> can be used for things we didn't anticipate. That's when the interesting
> stuff happens. Otherwise why are we doing this? So we can list Unicode
> share names. No. With a little luck, people will be able to basically copy
> a stationary, run 'ant compile' on their interface definitions, and get a
> jar and API documentation. Using PIDL would require converting all of
> their interfaces to the PIDL syntax.

Actually, *both* would probably be useful for Jarapac; as Chris noted,
the Samba folk have done a lot of stuff with PIDL that could be
leveraged with a backend generating Jarapac stubs.  Plus, it's pretty
much a given that they will continue prolifically expanding the
library of PIDL going forward.

Interoperability with MIDL would have obvious advantages, as noted. 
Realistically speaking, most IDL development outside of Samba is
currently done against MIDL; it would be ideal to take this existing
MIDL code and pump out instant java client and server stubs. 
Eventually this could include COM/DCOM interfaces, which would allow
interoperability with a huge slew of other applications.

I think both projects would have value, and could be able to coexist


More information about the jcifs mailing list