Prev: Benchmarking a toy example on SH-4
Next: Itanium had appeal
From: Quadibloc on 18 Apr 2010 10:08
On Apr 18, 3:56 am, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-
newsgro...(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote:

> One thing that I know xe did write was a call to open-source SOM.  Now
> that's something that would be very helpful.  Yes, NOM exists, but from
> what I'm told it isn't binary compatible with SOM, which rather misses
> one of the major points of using SOM.

I did not recognize these acronyms, but after some careful Googling, I
found this:

http://advice.cio.com/esther_schindler/a_little_som_thing

SOM and DSOM are the System Object Model and the Distributed System
Object Model from IBM, and NOM is the Netlabs Object Model.

(The article quoted doesn't mention NOM, and the reasons it gives for
open-sourcing SOM are such that it would seem, though, that NOM could
also serve those purposes.)

Oh, my... by an amazing coincidence (???) Esther Schindler was the
author of that article.

John Savard
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Benchmarking a toy example on SH-4
Next: Itanium had appeal