Issue 3598: Java mapping of register_orb_initializer (interceptors-rtf) Source: Progress Software (Mr. Eoghan Glynn, nobody) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: There appears to be some confusion in section 21.7.3.1 of ptc/2000-04-05 in the definition of the Java mapping for register_orb_initializer ... "The new property names are of the form: org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.<Service> where <Service> is the string name of a class which implements org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializer." specifies that a portion of the property name is used to identify the ORBInitializer class to instantiate; the semantics of the property value are left undefined. However the example: "To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Log- ging = com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp" implies that its the property value that identfies this class, and that the property name (needlessly) specifies its package. Can anyone indicate which of the above are the correct semantics for org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass properties? Also this section seems to confuse ORB properties (which I would understand to be those set via the properties parameter to org.omg.CORBA.ORB.init()) with system properties (i.e. those set via java -Dname=value). Resolution: In document ptc/00-04-05, make the following change. Revised Text: The last line in the Java mapping of register_orb_initializer is wrong. It reads: To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Logging = com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp It should read: To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp Actions taken: May 4, 2000: received issue January 9, 2001: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 15:27:41 -0500 From: Eoghan Glynn X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: Java mapping of register_orb_initializer Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: 9_;e9F@id9E~Pe9gMa!! Folks, There appears to be some confusion in section 21.7.3.1 of ptc/2000-04-05 in the definition of the Java mapping for register_orb_initializer ... "The new property names are of the form: org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass. where is the string name of a class which implements org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializer." specifies that a portion of the property name is used to identify the ORBInitializer class to instantiate; the semantics of the property value are left undefined. However the example: "To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Log- ging = com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp" implies that its the property value that identfies this class, and that the property name (needlessly) specifies its package. Can anyone indicate which of the above are the correct semantics for org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass properties? Also this section seems to confuse ORB properties (which I would understand to be those set via the properties parameter to org.omg.CORBA.ORB.init()) with system properties (i.e. those set via java -Dname=value). Thanks, Eoghan Glynn ------------------------------------ Orbix 2000 for Java Engineering Team IONA Technologies. ------------------------------------ From: butek@us.ibm.com Received: from southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com (southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com [9.37.3.209]) by e23.nc.us.ibm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA21614; Thu, 4 May 2000 13:06:37 -0500 Received: from d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com (d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com [9.67.228.40]) by southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with SMTP id NAA44990; Thu, 4 May 2000 13:25:15 -0400 Received: by d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.5 (863.2 5-20-1999)) id 852568D5.005FB150 ; Thu, 4 May 2000 13:25:13 -0400 X-Lotus-FromDomain: IBMUS To: Eoghan Glynn cc: interceptors-ftf@omg.org, issues@omg.org Message-ID: <852568D5.005FAFC1.00@d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 12:15:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Java mapping of register_orb_initializer Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: multipart/mixed; Boundary="0__=IW06ek2wRgiaYmlM6yF5PeKugP9eljEd1MKMPmlXl7rPl1l2vd6uBXA7" X-UIDL: &FEe9"UA!!":pd9\EC!! Well, that slipped through the cracks. I thought I changed it. Juergen, could you make an issue from Eoghan's note below? The example should read: To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp We don't care about the value. I don't understand your confusion about ORB properties. The Java binding spec says about properties: ? check in Applet parameter or application string array, if any ? check in properties parameter, if any ? check in the System properties ? check in orb.properties file, if it exists (Section 1.21.9.2, ?orb.properties file,? on page 1-128) ? fall back on a hardcoded default behavior So, extrapolating to our new property, it can be defined in any of these places. The example just happened to use a system property. On a related topic, issue 3545 ask the question: how should it be defined on the command line as an arg to main? Russell Butek butek@us.ibm.com Eoghan Glynn on 05/04/2000 03:27:41 PM To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org cc: Subject: Java mapping of register_orb_initializer Folks, There appears to be some confusion in section 21.7.3.1 of ptc/2000-04-05 in the definition of the Java mapping for register_orb_initializer ... "The new property names are of the form: org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass. where is the string name of a class which implements org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializer." specifies that a portion of the property name is used to identify the ORBInitializer class to instantiate; the semantics of the property value are left undefined. However the example: "To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Log- ging = com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp" implies that its the property value that identfies this class, and that the property name (needlessly) specifies its package. Can anyone indicate which of the above are the correct semantics for org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass properties? Also this section seems to confuse ORB properties (which I would understand to be those set via the properties parameter to org.omg.CORBA.ORB.init()) with system properties (i.e. those set via java -Dname=value). Thanks, Eoghan Glynn ------------------------------------ Orbix 2000 for Java Engineering Team IONA Technologies. ------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 19:08:19 -0500 From: Eoghan Glynn X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: butek@us.ibm.com CC: interceptors-ftf@omg.org, issues@omg.org Subject: Re: Java mapping of register_orb_initializer References: <852568D5.005FAFC1.00@d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: WF\!!2gF!!,(kd9X<:e9 > I don't understand your confusion about ORB properties. The Java binding > spec says about properties: > > ? check in Applet parameter or application string array, if any > ? check in properties parameter, if any > ? check in the System properties > ? check in orb.properties file, if it exists (Section 1.21.9.2, > ?orb.properties file,? on > page 1-128) > ? fall back on a hardcoded default behavior > > So, extrapolating to our new property, it can be defined in any of these > places. The example just happened to use a system property. Well, I guess the confusion came from section 1.29.9 of the IDL to Java mapping spec (99-07-53) only explicitly defining this search order for "the class names of the ORB implementation are located using the following search order:", i.e. for the org.omg.CORBA.ORB*Class properties, but not for ORB properties in general. But if its general practice to apply this search order to ORB properties in general (in particular to org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializer.* properties) then that clears it up. Thanks, Eoghan Glynn ------------------------------------ Orbix 2000 for Java Engineering Team IONA Technologies. ------------------------------------ From: butek@us.ibm.com Received: from southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com (southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com [9.37.3.209]) by e23.nc.us.ibm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA25046 for ; Thu, 4 May 2000 15:48:03 -0500 Received: from d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com (d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com [9.67.228.40]) by southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with SMTP id QAA44796 for ; Thu, 4 May 2000 16:06:41 -0400 Received: by d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.5 (863.2 5-20-1999)) id 852568D5.006E7463 ; Thu, 4 May 2000 16:06:27 -0400 X-Lotus-FromDomain: IBMUS To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Message-ID: <852568D5.006E725A.00@d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 14:56:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Java mapping of register_orb_initializer Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: &\0e9OjAe9\p>e9NQMe9 Eoghan Glynn on 05/04/2000 07:08:19 PM > > Well, I guess the confusion came from section 1.29.9 of the IDL to Java > mapping spec (99-07-53) only explicitly defining this search order for > "the class names of the ORB implementation are located using the > following search order:", i.e. for the org.omg.CORBA.ORB*Class > properties, but not for ORB properties in general. But if its general > practice to apply this search order to ORB properties in general (in > particular to org.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializer.* properties) > then that clears it up. I will admit that perhaps I'm putting my own reading into the spec. It DOES only talk about the class names of the ORB implementation, but since the only specified ORB properties that exist are the class names of the ORB implementation, I extrapolated and applied this statement to all ORB properties. Perhaps an issue should be raised against the Java RTF to change the statement to refer to ORB properties rather than names of the ORB? > > Thanks, > Eoghan Glynn > > ------------------------------------ > Orbix 2000 for Java Engineering Team > IONA Technologies. > ------------------------------------ > Russell Butek butek@us.ibm.com From: butek@us.ibm.com Received: from southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com (southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com [9.37.3.209]) by e22.nc.us.ibm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA16486 for ; Mon, 22 May 2000 09:51:25 -0500 Received: from d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com (d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com [9.67.228.36]) by southrelay02.raleigh.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with SMTP id KAA36468 for ; Mon, 22 May 2000 10:11:30 -0400 Received: by d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.5 (863.2 5-20-1999)) id 852568E7.004DF3CD ; Mon, 22 May 2000 10:11:26 -0400 X-Lotus-FromDomain: IBMUS To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Message-ID: <852568E7.004D1F0A.00@d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 10:02:20 -0400 Subject: Issue 3598 proposal Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: /_f!!flPd9;CP!!N[L!! The last line in the Java mapping of register_orb_initializer is wrong in doc # ptc/2000-04-05. It reads: To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Logging = com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp It should read: To run a program called MyApp using this logging service, the user could type: java -Dorg.omg.PortableInterceptor.ORBInitializerClass.com.x.Logging.LoggingService MyApp Russell Butek butek@us.ibm.com