Nadir,
+1 to make the platform abstraction layer a separate library.
I assume all our current libraries (client, transport, channel, etc) will
be linked with the platform abstraction library. In which case, I propose
moving trace into the platform abstraction library as well since all
libraries need it. Currently trace entrypoints are called by address from
the transport, channel, etc libraries, since these libraries are not linked
with AxisClient. This makes for horrible code which would be greatly
simplified by moving trace into the new platform abstraction library.
Mark
Mark Whitlock
IBM
----- Forwarded by Mark Whitlock/UK/IBM on 24/05/2005 11:35 -----
Nadir Amra
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To
23/05/2005 20:19 "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
<[email protected]>
cc
Please respond to
"Apache AXIS C Subject
Developers List" Re: Fw: Platform abstraction layer
thoughts
Mark,
I prefer that the platform abstraction layer is in a seperate library. Any
small functions, when it makes sense, can always be defined as inlined,
no?
Nadir K. Amra
Mark Whitlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/19/2005 04:30:41 AM:
>
>
>
>
> Hi Nadir,
> +1 to putting all platform-specific code in the platform abstraction
layer.
>
> The disadvantage of linking the platform-specific code into a separate
> library is that it stops the compiler from optimising small functions by
> inlining them. I guess the platform-specific layer is likely to be full
of
> such small functions. The advantage of linking the platform-specific
code
> into a separate library is that the transport, channel and XML parser
> libraries could all link with the PS library (since they are not linked
> with the AxisClient library).
>
> Which do you prefer?
> Mark
> Mark Whitlock
> IBM
>
