[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3884?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13057715#comment-13057715
]
Simon Laws commented on TUSCANY-3884:
-------------------------------------
Yes. Maybe semantics wasn't the right word to use. I'm referring to the code
that does local invocation (both PBV and PBR) being separate from the code that
does remote invocation. This is true at the moment it's just that the local
block of code is no modularized in the same way that the remote block of code
is.
Re. copy. We maybe need a separate JIRA for that but just for the moment...
For PBR IIRC the local binding optimization applies a databinding on the
reference side and misses out the databinding on the service side hence when
reference and service interfaces are different the appropriate databinding is
applies.
For PBV there is the extra line that "copies" the result of the client side
databinding. I think that by this stage we know that the source and target are
at least expected to be of the same databinding. That might not be JAXB though.
Is that what you were getting at?
> binding.sca local delegation
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-3884
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3884
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.0-Beta2
> Reporter: Simon Laws
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Java-SCA-2.0
>
>
> Binding.sca currently delegates for remote semantics but implements local
> semantics in it's own provider. Should we create a separate local binding an
> delegate to that so it can we swapped out without affecting the provider
> functionality.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
