Hi,
I think we should further understand what roles the core, binding and
implementation can play to enforce the pass-by-value semantics.
Implementation extension: knows the setting of @AllowsPassByReference, might
know if the implement code would modify the input data and if the output
data could be changed by the client side (for example, implementation.bpel
and implementation.xquery probably never mutate the client data).
Binding extension: knows if the underlying protocol copies the input/output
data so that the target implementation would be isolated from direct data
references to the client side (for example, the binding.ws, binding.jms or
binding.rmi will always marshal/unmarshal the data accross the transport and
pass-by-value is naturally achieved). knows the context (such as
classloader) to copy/transform the data if necessary.
Core: knows if the interface is remote (pass-by-value only applies to
remotable interfaces), can interact with the binding/implementation to
decide if it should add a pass-by-value interceptor to enforce the
semantics. knows if the data would be transformed by databinding layer (the
data will be copied if it happens).
If we agree on the above, we can then reflect these roles in the different
layers (maybe SPI as well).
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: Bypassing unnecessary transforms by Tuscany databinding
framework
Scott Kurz wrote:
Some examples of what I meant..
For the service instance I'm invoking I'd like to know:
* target JVM is it the same as the client instance? (is this a
"Node" in Tuscany terms?, sorry of my ignorance)
* target classloader (if it's not the same or a child I can't do PBR)
* target DB (if it's the same maybe I can do PBR)
* is target annotated with @AllowsPBR
It looks like these are things that a binding knows about.
So, is it fair to say that it would be better to not have a magic
databinding interceptor added automatically to the invocation chain and
instead let the binding decide to copy or not or transform or not based on
its knowledge of the target that it's talking to?
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
