Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Dec 19, 2006, at 9:40 AM, Simon Nash wrote:
Jim Marino wrote:
<cut>...</cut>
Tuscany SCA allows services to be implemented in variety of
languages such as Java, JavaScript and C++. Tuscany SCA runtime
is implemented in Java and C++ and can easily be extended to
support any communication transport, qualities of service or
programming model and can be used in conjunction with other
technologies such as Spring, Axis and Celtix.
[JFM the above sentence combines two separate things. I would
re- word as:
There are Java and C++ SCA runtimes that support services
implemented in variety of languages such as Java, JavaScript and
C ++. Both runtimes and can easily be extended to support
additional communication transports, qualities of service or
programming models. In addition, they can be used in
conjunction with other technologies such as Spring, Axis and
Celtix.]
Today we have two separate runtimes for Java and C++. I'd like to
see us
move towards what Venkat is describing, i.e., an integrated
runtime that
supports components written in Java, C++ and other languages.
It depends on what you mean by "integrated". For me "federated" may
be a way to describe it as the runtime architectures are fairly
distinct as well as the capabilities of the two implementations.
"Federated" would be a good first step. There could be further steps
beyond this into "integrated" territory, though I suspect that these
terms may have different interpretations for different people. I'd
like to think this through a bit more and come back with some thoughts
on how this could work (whatever we call it).
I don't see these as mutually exclusive - we should be able to federate
integrated runtimes :-)
The languages supported by a runtime should not depend on the
technology used to implement the runtime - for example, both Java and
C++ runtimes already support components in non-native languages such as
Ruby or as SCA Composites. There's nothing stopping the Java runtime
from supporting C++ components or vice versa and work in that area
could be quite interesting.
I think federation is at a larger scale - it's about making runtimes
work together irrespective of implementation technology and author. We
can start that with one runtime (say C++ or Java) and extend through
Tuscany implementations to others' - although the more general cases
probably require specification.
This use of the terms "federated" and "integrated" makes sense to me.
In these terms I was thinking integrated, i.e., the ability of the
Tuscany Java and Tuscany C++ runtimes to know wbout each other and
work together in a seamless way to deploy and invoke components
written in a number of languages, some with a native runtime and others
hosted in a JVM environment.
As Jeremy says, this doesn't exclude federating multiple instances
of this integrated runtime.
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
