Re: [C++] Assembly class diagram
Pete Robbins wrote: Looks interesting. One quick comment: what is Object in C++ terms? ;-) Good question. I was trying to keep the class diagram language-independent with types like String, QName, NCName, AnyURI, and Object, and using Object for Component property values. If I understand the SCA spec correctly, the value of a component property can be a primitive type, a string, an SDO DataObject or another data-binding-specific representation of a complex type. In most programming languages primitive types are not Objects, so my usage of Object here was not quite correct. I'll define an Any type to represent these property values in the class diagram (actually corresponding to the xsd:any used by the spec to define these types). In the C++ runtime, will that translate to a void *? -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [C++] Assembly class diagram
On 7/21/06, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pete Robbins wrote: Looks interesting. One quick comment: what is Object in C++ terms? ;-) Good question. I was trying to keep the class diagram language-independent with types like String, QName, NCName, AnyURI, and Object, and using Object for Component property values. If I understand the SCA spec correctly, the value of a component property can be a primitive type, a string, an SDO DataObject or another data-binding-specific representation of a complex type. In most programming languages primitive types are not Objects, so my usage of Object here was not quite correct. I'll define an Any type to represent these property values in the class diagram (actually corresponding to the xsd:any used by the spec to define these types). In the C++ runtime, will that translate to a void *? That's what I thought when Pete posed the question, but this still leaves the issue of how to deal with the pointer when it needs to be used somewhere - there's no way of knowing how to deal with/get the value because it isn't typed in any way. One way to get round this would be to have a typed thing struct or similar which would consist of a void * pointer and an enum to define the type, but then, we're starting to head into SDO territory here.. ;-) Andy
[C++] Assembly class diagram
I checked in a first attempt at a class diagram representing the recursive assembly model: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/sandbox/sebastien/cpp/diagrams/service.jpg It's probably not all correct, it's just a very first cut to initiate a discussion on how people view the new recursive assembly. Any thoughts or questions? -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [C++] Assembly class diagram
Looks interesting. One quick comment: what is Object in C++ terms? ;-) On 20/07/06, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I checked in a first attempt at a class diagram representing the recursive assembly model: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/sandbox/sebastien/cpp/diagrams/service.jpg It's probably not all correct, it's just a very first cut to initiate a discussion on how people view the new recursive assembly. Any thoughts or questions? -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Pete
