Issue 2472:  Interfaces and values should be mapped consistently (java2idl-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature:  Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Summary: The Java to IDL mapping rules for remote interfaces and value types 
 should be consistent except where there is clear need for differences.
 

Resolution: Closed, accepted
Revised Text: a. Change the mapping for exceptions on methods of value types
   to not map RemoteException, RuntimeException and their
   subclasses to IDL.
b. Change the mapping for property accessors on value types to
   be the same as on remote interfaces.
c. Changes a and b also apply to abstract interfaces.
Actions taken:
February 22, 1999: received issue
June 4, 1999: closed issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:46:18 +0000
From: Simon Nash <nash@hursley.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM
To: issues <issues@omg.org>
CC: java2idl <java2idl-rtf@omg.org>
Subject: Interfaces and values should be mapped consistently

The Java to IDL mapping rules for remote interfaces and value types 
should be consistent except where there is clear need for differences.

Proposed changes:

a. Change the mapping for exceptions on methods of value types
   to not map RemoteException, RuntimeException and their 
   subclasses to IDL.

b. Change the mapping for property accessors on value types to
   be the same as on remote interfaces. 

c. Changes a and b also apply to abstract interfaces.

   Simon
-- 
Simon C Nash, Technology Architect, IBM Java Technology Centre
Tel. +44-1962-815156   Fax +44-1962-818999    Hursley, England
Internet: nash@hursley.ibm.com   Lotus Notes: Simon Nash@ibmgb