[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sdo] C++ Spec
Dr, Aupperle, thanks for responding. The company I work for, Rogue Wave
Software, has an SDO product based largely on 2.+. I would like to be part of
any discussions or work on translating what is done for 3.0 Java spec to a C++ equivalent. My biggest concern at the moment is that
it seems like the new Java spec features will largely depend on Java specific
features. Such as annotations and using Types generically for creating data objects
and interacting with POJOs and such, which aren’t a trivial thing to implement
in C++. Basically, if it is a feature/concept they want to use that is
available because of the interpretive aspect of the Java language it is not
going to be so trivial to migrate the same concept to C++ or any other non-interpretive
languages. In fact, a lot of that behavior would need to be accomplished via
code generation and compile time and might even require additional interfaces
to be implemented by an end user. Data won’t just be “plug and
play” in those cases. I don’t really understand why there isn’t
just a Spec that is language independent and then Java, like all other language
specs are driven by that. Especially if one of the big points of SDO is that
it defines a common interface cross language. Has that principle changed, or
have I misinterpreted that as a goal when it really isn’t? If that was
not the case, then should there be another committee all together to determine
a diverging spec for C++ if the desired concepts with the Java version of SDO
become incompatible? Please, anyone chime in! Thanks, ~James From: Bryan Aupperle
[mailto:aupperle@us.ibm.com]
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]