sca-c-cpp message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-c-cpp] Fw: [sca-c-cpp-comment] comments from Jacques D.
- From: Andrew Borley <BORLEY@uk.ibm.com>
- To: sca-c-cpp@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:54:30 +0100
Hi All,
Jira issues CCPP-78 to CCPP-85 have
been raised in response to the various issues raised on the sca-c-cpp-comment
list
See:
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-78
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-79
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-80
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-81
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-82
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-83
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-84
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/CCPP-85
Cheers
Andrew
____________________________________________________________
Andrew Borley
Websphere ESB Development
Tel: 245393 Ext: +44 (0) 1962 815393 Mob: +44 (0) 7971 805547
E-mail: borley@uk.ibm.com
Mailpoint 211, IBM (UK) Ltd, Hursley Park, Winchester, Hants, SO21 2JN
____________________________________________________________
From:
| Bryan Aupperle <aupperle@us.ibm.com>
|
To:
| sca-c-cpp@lists.oasis-open.org
|
Date:
| 24/06/2009 17:48
|
Subject:
| [sca-c-cpp] Fw: [sca-c-cpp-comment]
comments from Jacques D. |
More from Jacques Durand. (Andy his first two additional comments
below need to be raised in Jira. The last is an offshoot of the PDF
conversion problem he already noted).
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com
----- Forwarded by Bryan Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM on 06/24/2009 12:44 PM -----
"Jacques R. Durand"
<JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>
06/23/2009 05:30 PM
|
To
| Bryan Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
| <sca-c-cpp-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Subject
| RE: [sca-c-cpp-comment] comments from
Jacques D. |
|
Bryan:
I guess I am a little confused about how the distinction between Composite
and Component plays in the C++ implementation model:.
Do you consider "composite" as just an implementation concept
only? (i.e. no dedicated class).
I see composite mentioned as a COmponent implementation "scope",
so it seems it does not have a construct or class on its own.
If that is the case that should be more clearly stated, as in the Assembly
mark-up it
appears that a component is always used inside a Composite - and not by
itself.
So that would also address my question about the "promotion"
concept in Assembly that relates the Services of a composite to the Service
of a component inside.
Other comments:
- it is unclear what the notion of "SCA runtime" corresponds
to in C++. Is there a particular framework or container (in C++) to manage
components? For example, what entity is raising SCA Exceptions ? (as opposed
to business exceptions).
- The ServiceProxy base class is empty... is it really needed?
- it looks like (in PDF) the table of contents is not uptodate: section
6.5 is announced as SCAExceptions, but it is actually 6.6.
Regards,
Jacques
From: Bryan Aupperle [mailto:aupperle@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:44 AM
To: Jacques R. Durand
Cc: sca-c-cpp-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [sca-c-cpp-comment] comments from Jacques D.
Thank-you for comment on the formatting. Definitely a PDF generation
problem.
Before the TC can fully consider your comment on promotion, would you be
able to elaborate on what you think may be needed? The promotion
of services and reverences as defined in the Assembly specification is
completely invisible to a component implementation and thus would not be
reflected in an API or component/componentType definition.
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Chair OASIS SCA-C-CPP TC
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com
"Jacques R. Durand"
<JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>
06/23/2009 01:55 PM
|
To
| <sca-c-cpp-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [sca-c-cpp-comment] comments from Jacques
D. |
|
The spec appears to cover a lot of ground for C/C++ developers.
My only comments so far:
- in the PDF, title of section 6.4 seems to not be right (formatting
issue?)
- the "promotion" mechanism described in Assembly specification,
does not seem to be addressed here.
Jacques Durand
Fujitsu
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]