Issue 2550:  Dealing with reserved suffixes (e.g. POA) (java-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature:  Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Summary: ptc/98-10-14 changes the mapping of names for skeleton classes; for:
 
     Module M {
       interface Face {};
     };
 
 the name of the skeleton and tie classes are now M.FacePOA and M.FacePOATie
 instead of the C++-style POA_M.Face and POA_M.Face_tie.
 

Resolution: Close, no change.
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
March 18, 1999: received issue
February 27, 2001: closed issue
Discussion: 
Close, no change. Section 2.1 seems clear that the mapping rules apply to names of the form *interface*POA, not
to plain POA
End of Annotations:=====
X400-Received: by mta umg in /PRMD=ICL/ADMD=GOLD 400/C=GB/ ;  Relayed
; Thu, 18 Mar 99 18:24:10 +0000
X400-Received: by mta man23xc in /PRMD=icl/ADMD=gold 400/C=GB/ ;
; converted (IA5-Text) ;
  Relayed ; Thu, 18 Mar 99 18:12:01 +0000
X400-Received: by /PRMD=icl/ADMD=gold 400/C=GB/ ;  converted
(IA5-Text) ;
  Relayed ; Thu, 18 Mar 99 18:29:08 +0000
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 99 18:29:08 +0000
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=icl/ADMD=gold 400/C=GB/;man0506
0000026100001575]
X400-Originator: "NP Sharman" <N.P.Sharman@man0506.x400.icl.co.uk>
X400-Recipients: java-rtf@omg.org 
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
Original-Encoded-Information-Types: { 1 3 12 2 1001 1 0 4 300 0 707 }
Content-Identifier: 1575
Priority: normal
From: "NP Sharman" <n.p.sharman@x400.icl.co.uk>
To: java-rtf@omg.org
References: <199903180812.AAA04960@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us>
Importance: normal
Subject: Dealing with reserved suffixes (e.g. POA)







ptc/98-10-14 changes the mapping of names for skeleton classes; for:

    Module M {
      interface Face {};
    };

the name of the skeleton and tie classes are now M.FacePOA and
M.FacePOATie
instead of the C++-style POA_M.Face and POA_M.Face_tie.

To support this change, POA and POATie are added to the list of
reserved
suffices.  I've just changed our compiler to include this change, with
the
following interesting results:

    IDL interface POA => Java interface _POA
    IDL operation POA::create_POA => Java method _POA._create_POA

I don't think that's what is supposed to happen!

The first problem is resolved by prefixing names only when one of the
special suffixes is a _proper_ suffix of the IDL name, where xPOA has
POA
as a proper suffix (so is mapped to _xPOA) but plain POA doesn't (so
stays
the same).  Does that need clarifying in the spec, or is it already
clear
enough for everyone except me?

To solve the second problem, I think it isn't necessary to check
operation
names against the list of suffixes; they can only clash against
classes
derived from other types in the same interface, but they've already
been
pushed out into FacePackage (by section 25.17).

Incidentally, 25.17 could also cover types nested in other types, such
as:

    //IDL
    struct {
      enum Horrible {X,Y,Z} nasty;
    }

(or has that already been banned by the Core RTF?)


Regards
Nick


Nick Sharman
DAIS Product Architect
PeerLogic Ltd
nsharman@peerlogic.com