tuscany-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Gentsch ...@e-tge.de>
Subject Re: Porting Tuscany C++ to C++11 and some code cleanup
Date Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:43:14 GMT

OK, many thx for this info!

Regarding SDO - yes, I noticed that there was not a lot of activity
during the last years.
Hello out there: Is there anybody else still using this?

Rgd SDO as SCA-internal data-flow mechanism - what is being used now?
I know about libxml2 (actually its being used in SCA/SDO :-), nothing
yet about JSON, will read.

Rgd updating SDO: If nobody else cares, then I'm happy with it for now,
so lets let it rest in peace ... (except that I'll have to deal with it
all by myself if I find any problems :-)

Rgds + nice WE,
  tge

On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 23:13 -0800, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> 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
>         supported.
> 
> 
> 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:
>         
>         https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3841
>         https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3715
>         https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3597
>         
>         https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1552
>         
>         
> 
> 
> 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? :)
>  
>         >
>         > [1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2011/
>         > [2]
>         http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2011/n3242.pdf
>         > [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B11
>         > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3598
>         
>         
> [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/
> 
> 




Mime
View raw message