On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Thomas Gentsch <tg@e-tge.de> wrote:
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 10:38 -0800, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Thomas Gentsch <tg@e-tge.de> wrote:
> Great! Papers from the C++11 standard work groups are available on
> open-std.org there [1]. The final ISO standard is not free but the
> last draft [2] is free.  If you just want a high level overview
> there's one on Wikipedia [3]. Hope that helps.

Shortly looked through it, definitely interesting. Of course that makes
me worry a bit how far compilers support this already ... particularly
as partially maybe (as in our case) older OS versions are to be

On Linux, GCC 4.3 and later, see [5]. On MacOS, CLang 3.1 and later, see [6].
Of course you don't need to worry about it if you're using SDO as I'm not touching the M3 SDO code anyway :).

I quickly looked into Jira and found at least these:



Ah, I now realize that you're using SDO, and I was only looking for SCA JIRAs.

> The C++ trunk has already gone through some refactoring and quite a
> few changes over time since M3... There's no SDO anymore

Oh!!! Actually I always believed Tuscany is mainly about SDO!
Well, then I have to correct myself - we are using Tuscany C++ SDO. I
wasn't aware of this at all (haven't looked into it for a while though)

Tus-SCA-ny is mainly about SCA [7]. SCA is a programming model for building apps with components that provide or use services, and initially used SDO to represent (mostly XML) data flowing through these services.

> (like the Java trunk, which I believe dropped SDO as well), the
> composite files use the new SCDL from OASIS, the runtime integrates
> with Apache HTTPD, etc. There's still an integration with Axis2C but
> I've not looked at it for a very long time.
> So, if you're still using SDO you'll probably want to stick to the M3
> level, but I can help apply your patch to a maintenance branch off M3
> at some point if that helps.

Well, if SDO is dead anyway then there will not be any release anymore I
suppose, so maybe no need to bother.


I'm not sure about the state of SDO. I've not seen any activity on it for some time now, and I'm not planning to do anything with SDO at this point, but can try to help on my spare time if you or others are interested in maintaining or evolving the SDO code.

OK, then I should look into the alternatives? Is there any replacement?
Many thx + regards,

I personally like libxml2 [8] for XML and jansson [9] for JSON, and there's several other good XML and JSON libraries out there too, but if SDO works for you and you have a good handle on that code (and it looks like it since you were able to create some good patches), then why change? :)
[5] http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html 
[6] http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html
[7] http://www.oasis-opencsa.org/committees 
[8] http://www.xmlsoft.org
[9] http://www.digip.org/jansson/