Thanks Pete, Yes, these issues I am putting together and posting came up when doing a portability study using HydraSDO to build Tuscany SCA. Since the SDO spec is separate from SCA, we were thinking this would be a good goal. That seems to mean making them internal to Tuscany SDO or taking them to the committee.
Michael -----Original Message----- From: Pete Robbins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 9:02 AM To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org Subject: Re: C++ SDO spec compliance/portability: SDORuntimeException Michael, An interesting set of questions! I'm not convinced that adding methods to the spec api classes is a compliance issue (in fact it may be impossible to implement without modifying the spec apis ... constructors etc.) but it could be a portability issue if it is not clear that the methods are implementation specific. The methods below are added so that an SDORuntimeException can contain a "stack" of locations indicating where it was thrown/rethrown etc.. These are only used within the Tuscany implementation so I guess could be moved to protected and make the classes that use them friends?? I'm not sure how useful these are anyway but the exception class pre-dates it being used for SDORuntimeException. There are also methods to allow simple streaming: catch(SDORuntimeException& e) { cout << e; } I like the simplicity of this but I guess we could write an SDOUtils method to do something similar instead. I'm not sure if any of these should be mandated by the specification. Cheers, On 21/06/07, Michael Yoder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > The Tuscany SDO C++ class SDORuntimeException has these public member > functions which do not appear in the C++ 2.1 specification: > > > SDO_API severity_level getSeverity() const; SDO_API void > setSeverity(severity_level sev); SDO_API void setMessageText(const > std::string& msg_text); SDO_API void setExceptionLocation(const > std::string& file, > unsigned long line, > const std::string& function=""); > SDO_API void setLocation(const std::string& file, > unsigned long line, > const std::string& function=""); > > SDO_API void trace(const std::string& text="%1:\n %3 %4 %2"); > > SDO_API virtual ostream& PrintSelf(ostream &os) const; SDO_API friend > ostream& operator<< (ostream &os, const SDORuntimeException &except); > > > What's the rational behind these additional member functions? Would it > be appropriate to file a bug to have them removed from the public API? > Or alternatively a bug for them to be submitted to the spec committee? > > Thanks, > > Michael Yoder > Software Developer > Rogue Wave Software > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Pete --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
