On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Raymond Feng <enjoyj...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry, you seems to be dancing around the "optional" vs "mandatory" terms > here. I lost a few hours to figure it out that was the root cause of a > problem I ran into.
I'm not dancing around it i'm trying to be quiet clear - implementing the mandatory spec features is the most important thing and support for optional features comes second. It took much much much more than a few hours to get all the compliance tests passing so i don''t like the thought of letting them get broken again. > By my knowledge, we already had support for the allowsPassByReference > optimization for the service side (the reference side came into the spec at > later time) before the code was disabled. The feature (even it is optional > for the spec compliance) is important to the use cases I have because we > don't want to copy several MBs data. IMHO, Tuscany is not purely just a > reference implementation of the SCA specs. Yes its not just a reference impl but if doesn't pass the compliance tests it would lose a lot of value. Supporting other or optional use cases is fine too but it needs to fit in with that. > Anyway, I'm enabling the optimization for both reference and service sides. As i said in the other email - terrific. ...ant
