Hi,
Also, will you expand on your "manage bindings" concept? I am not
sure why
this is treated as a special case, with full schemata support as
well. To me
the stanzas:
<iq from="[email protected]/villein"
to="[email protected]/farm" type="get" id="yyyy">
<manage_bindings xmlns="http://linkedprocess.org/2009/06/Farm#";
vm_id="62F4E464">
<binding name="age"/>
</manage_bindings>
</iq>
and
<iq from="[email protected]/villein"
to="[email protected]/farm" type="get" id="yyyy">
<submit_job xmlns="http://linkedprocess.org/2009/06/Farm#";
vm_id="62F4E464">
age;
</submit_job>
</iq>
are functionally equivalent.
It depends on the virtual machine you are using. For example, Jython
doesn't support value returns of that nature. How a virtual machine
reacts to "age;" is up to the virtual machine implementation and not
dictated by Linked Process. Moreover, with manage_bindings you can set
and retrieve sets of variables, not just single variables. So, while
you can get functionally the same behavior with manage_bindings and
submit_job, there are differences in functionality in various
situations.
I have been interested in removing manage_bindings as of lately cause
its too complicated to implement due to the requirement for threading
a virtual machine. That is, a submit_job can be executing while, in
parallel/concurrently, you can be managing the virtual machine's
bindings. Implementation-wise, this asks alot of the developer of a
virtual machine --- well, let me put it this way, it is the most
complicated command to implement. So I dunno---Josh likes it though :).
Take care,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
