Altaf,
I looked at SCA three months ago and spend couple of weekends (night-outs
actually).
SCA will be great solution going forward where applications that are written in
C++ needs to work in multiple environments (consumers could be C++ or Java) and
act as a container of any sorts.
Issue is that, the current SCA-native code does not cut it. My evaluation was
below,
Dislikes:
1. usage of namespaces and exceptions are not supported in all embedded
platforms.[not a concern on server side]
2. I really don't like the existing approach which requires the marshalling of
operation arguments in the Proxy/Wrapper to an intermediate ParamterTypes.
Also, the code is duplicated in DataObject
This can be achieved by using something like, map<"datatype_stringname",
void* data> that can be passed to the model to be serialized. Even better,
using boost::any will allow genericity and
I would follow the concept of pushing the service binding information out
of stub/wrapper just like the transport or RPC modules.
3. Removing dependency on any fixed parsing technology (xml in this case)
4. No need for dynamic type identification over the wire format [which is
actually a great feature on the luxury platforms]
5. For C++ only environment, concept of domain, composite, components is an
overload.
6. Also, for CPPImplementation, the wrapper code does not need to make this
intermediate conversion of types and RPC invocations (Please let me know if I
am wrong). Cuz, the real implementation already supports function descriptions.
Well, I will see if I can provide samples.
Likes:
1. Best comment was the layered design of core, model and extensions.
ServiceProxy, ServiceWrappers and Operation (which is basically a generic way
of storing RPC identifiers)
I actually got the SCA tweaked to remove the SDO and DAS and the code size was
less than 500KB. I preferred static data marshalling factory of all types to
get rid of the SDO and DAS. The wire protocol format in the service binding
should be sufficient to make it interoperable.
Please note that, I have disliked some very nice features of SCA mainly to make
it practical in embedded world.These points may make no sense on the server
side with greater availability of memory, cpu and storage.
My conclusion was to base the framework on WSDL + OSGi + SCA (conversations
feature is really nice and lacks in WSDL).
I will revisit SCA after some time to see if SDO can be developed with lower
footprint (i don't need all the features of SDO like change summary).
Thanks,
Shiva
________________________________
From: Altaf Muneer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 11:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Tuscany SCA Native
Hi Haleh, Simon,
Thanks for the responses and comments..
> Do you have a pure C/C++ environment or is this an environment where Java and
> C++ components will be used in the same composite?
We have a pure C/C++ environment..
We are planning to use Tuscany SCA native (a stripped down version if that is
possible) in an embedded environment
> At the moment I think it's a matter of looking at how the existing bindings
> work an doing similar.
Yeah, i think thats what we will try to do..
Thank you for your time and suggestions
Regards,
Altaf
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:24 PM, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Hi Atlaf,
Do you have a pure C/C++ environment or is this an environment where Java and
C++ components will be used in the same composite?
Haleh
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:25 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Hi Altaf
Some comments in line...
Simon
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Altaf Muneer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Hi,
I was just checking the SCA Native strain of Tuscany and I had the following
questions..
Is there any ongoing work in Tuscany SCA Native? (I noticed that the last
release was in May 2007)
Not a lot. I did just check in a patch that one of the community contributed
but other than that there hasn't been recent discussion about how to move it
forward. Good opportunity if you want to get involved;-)
Is there any support for C in Tuscany SCA Native?
Not yet FAIK. There is a spec for C component types
(http://www.osoa.org/download/attachments/35/SCA_ClientAndImplementationModelforC_V100.pdf?version=1)
but no implementation of it yet.
Are there any resources which will help one add new bindings for Tuscany SCA
native?
It looks a bit thin at the moment. At the moment I think it's a matter of
looking at how the existing bindings work an doing similar.
I would be grateful if anybody can answer these questions/ point me to some
resources where I can find answers to these questions.
Regards,
Altaf
