Udayanga, lets go with what you have already done. As we discussed off-line, we can give the same experience for users for defining both endpoint and sequence templates. We can improve things at later.
Thanks, Indika On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Udayanga Wickramasinghe <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Indika, > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:03 PM, indika kumara <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Udayanga, +1 for the approach. >> >> However, I have several concerns >> >> Could this and the endpoint template proposed by Supun be similar? >> Personally, I believe it would be better to reduce language constructs >> defined by the language. As the synapse language supposed to be a DSL, I >> think making it simple, domain specific, and intutive would be important. >> >> it has similar intent..but implementations might be different...IMO what > supun has suggested is a static configuration for endpoints without any > parametrization. > > > >> Supun used 'endpoint-template' and in your configuration it is 'template' >> (is this a sequence-template?). >> >> yes it is more on the lines of a sequence-template > > >> We may be able to use 'template' for Both or at least the same way of >> doing - conceptual integrity. >> > > true. But since they contain some amount of orthogonality , I think best > option is to implement these different cases first and see the possibility > of connecting them later :) > > Regards, > Udayanga-- > > *Udayanga Wickramasinghe* > Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com, > *email: **[email protected]* <[email protected]>* cell: +94 (77) 983-4365 > blog: **http://udayangawiki.blogspot.com*<http://udayangawiki.blogspot.com/> > * > twitter: **http://twitter.com/udayanga_wick*<http://twitter.com/udayanga_wick> > * > * >
