Simon,
One comment inline.
Yours, Mike.
Simon Laws wrote:
Following on from the thread about identifying binding targets [1] the SCA
assembly specification (lines 2319-2327) describes a binding name as being
unique within a reference or service. If a binding name is not specified in
the SCDL this is not the case currently. I.e the each binding adopts the
name of the reference or service to which it belongs. This makes
identification of an individual binding difficult, for example, if you
wanted to retrieve the details of an individual binding artifact from the
live model. In the particular case where a default is chosen for a binding
name (as opposed to a name having been specified) how about we do the
following:
References - Append the name of the target service to the end of the
reference name to form the binding name
Services - Append a number to the end of the binding name based on the
position of the binding name in the bindings list.
Why treat references differently to services? Why not use the idea of
appending a number in both cases? What about the case where the same
binding on a reference gets used for more than one target service?
There are a couple of places that use the binding name that could do with a
little explanation if anyone knows the details.
CompositeActivator.addReferenceWire()
for (Binding binding : callbackService.getBindings()) {
// first look for a callback binding whose name matches the
reference binding name
if (binding.getName().equals(refBinding.getName())) {
callbackBinding = binding;
break;
}
}
Not sure why this is checking that the callback binding name matches the
reference binding name before choosing a binding.Under what circumstances
will these names either match or not match.
There is also something similar going on in
CallbackReferenceImpl.selectCallbackWire()
// no exact match, so find callback binding with same name as
service binding
EndpointReference to = msgContext.getTo();
if (to == null) {
//FIXME: need better exception
throw new RuntimeException("Destination for forward call is not
available");
}
for (RuntimeWire wire : wires) {
if
(wire.getSource().getBinding().getName().equals(to.getBinding().getName()))
{
//FIXME: need better way to represent dynamic wire
if (wire.getTarget().getURI().equals("/")) { // dynamic wire
//FIXME: avoid doing this for genuine dynamic wires
return cloneAndBind(msgContext, wire);
}
//FIXME: no dynamic wire, so should attempt to create a
static wire
}
}
Again it's filtering bindings based on binding name but it's not clear what
the circumstances are where this match will be successful.
Regards
Simon
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg26380.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
