On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 04:34, Michael Meeks wrote: > For each corba method we add an IDL [or other] annotation that > describes the method behavior and (re-)ordering constraints. Thus: > > + oneway foo (in string baa) [ handle_at_idle, no_re_enter ]; > > Or perhaps - for people who like blocking: > > + string getMyName () [ no_re_enter ] > > Thus people can invoke methods, no re-entrancy will occur on that > method invoke, and we can queue methods execution until idle. It's > really quite easy to do in the ORB - but needs some IDL extensions / > poking. Possibly some evil #pragma or something.
Isn't it much easier to just *always* disallow re-entrancy, and queue incoming calls in the idle loop? (With the possible exception of calls performed within the implementation of the CORBA method you are invoking, just to have the same behavior as local calls?) I am not sure I understand why we need this fine-grained degree of control on the method's behavior. It just looks really messy to me. -- Ettore _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
