On 03/28/2012 12:26 PM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
MARKER: These services are not intended to be instantiated via their service
names.
How is it in general with service names, if one browses services.rdb
(either of them), one doesn't have to look long to notice components
that have identical service names (but different implementation
names). What does this mean? That they are not supposed to be
instantiated via service names but via implementation names? Sorry if
this is a very fundamental question, but I guess I never fully have
understood UNO...
Slide 8 ("Services of the Past") of
<http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/ooocon2004/presentations/friday/shinyhappyuno.pdf>
tried to explain that.
(And there's unfortunately lots of these, needlessly obscuring things in many
ways.)
Indeed. Is there any point at all in cluttering services.rdb (and
other configuration files?) with these components if they aren't
looked for from there at run-time anyway?
At least theoretically, applications could read that information at
runtime. (And it is really only .rdb files where this information is
preserved at runtime. For example, neither cppumaker nor javamaker
generate output for old-style services.)
Stephan
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
