
The adoption of distributed computing has brought with it the problem of interoperability. Today, program developers need to interoperate over large and complex heterogeneous networks. Dealing with the interoperability problems that these networks can provide leads to increasing the complexity of the overall system. This complexity can be significantly reduced through the introduction of an interface definition language which adds an abstraction layer capable of handling many of the underlying problems. Two major interface definition languages being used today include CORBA's Interface Definition Language (IDL) and Microsoft's Interface Definition Language (MIDL) associated with COM/DCOM. We provide an overview of both interface definition languages and a comparison between them based on our experiences developing distributed systems using both. We draw some conclusions about the strengths and weaknesses of both.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
