Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory (interceptors-rtf) Source: Humboldt-Universitaet (Mr. Harald Boehme, nobody) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: For better usability of the coding and symmetry of encoding and decoding it is nessesary to extend the information for the Codec selection. The byte order should be selectable in the request for a Codec. Rationale: To allow generation of identical encoding values for the same parameters, it must be possible to select the endianness. Proposed Resolution: Extend "struct Encoding" in section 13.7 of ptc/00-03-03 with an additional field "boolean byte_order". Resolution: see above Revised Text: Actions taken: June 9, 2000: received issue April 26, 2010: closed issue Discussion: Resolution: Close issue with no change. This needs a reasonable use case. That was requested but not given. Please see the issue's archive. End of Annotations:===== Sender: boehme@informatik.hu-berlin.de Message-ID: <3941153F.711C67BE@informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 18:03:11 +0200 From: Harald Boehme X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: de, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: issues@omg.org CC: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-UIDL: HS9e92c]d984Le9:GKe9 For better usability of the coding and symmetry of encoding and decoding it is nessesary to extend the information for the Codec selection. The byte order should be selectable in the request for a Codec. Rationale: To allow generation of identical encoding values for the same parameters, it must be possible to select the endianness. Proposed Resolution: Extend "struct Encoding" in section 13.7 of ptc/00-03-03 with an additional field "boolean byte_order". Regards, Harald -- <<<< Harald Bvhme, Berlin 12489 >>>> <<<< Radicke Str. 52 >>>> <<<< boehme@informatik.hu-berlin.de >>>> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007191921.MAA02986@shorter.eng.sun.com> From: Harold Carr To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory Content-Type: text X-UIDL: RJ!!!2i^!!\mE!!ZT$!! Check http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue3693.txt for the original. It basically calls for adding boolean byte_order to struct Encoding. This seems reasonable. Except I would probably make it something like short byte_order with constants: BIG_ENDIAN LITTLE_ENDIAN DEFAULT so when you do not have an opinion the ORB can choose its native byte_ordering. I'd like to include this in the next vote round so please respond soon. Cheers, Harold From: Paul Kyzivat To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: RE: Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:21:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UIDL: 6Z7e9eY*!!cFnd9YYNe9 sounds good to me > -----Original Message----- > From: Harold Carr [mailto:harold.carr@eng.sun.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 3:22 PM > To: interceptors-ftf@omg.org > Subject: Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory > > > > Check http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue3693.txt for the original. It > basically calls for adding > > boolean byte_order > > to struct Encoding. > > This seems reasonable. Except I would probably make it something like > > short byte_order > > with constants: > > BIG_ENDIAN > LITTLE_ENDIAN > DEFAULT > > so when you do not have an opinion the ORB can choose its native > byte_ordering. > > I'd like to include this in the next vote round so please respond > soon. > > Cheers, > Harold > Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 19:52:12 -0230 From: Matthew Newhook To: Harold Carr Cc: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory Message-ID: <20000719195212.A3630@ooc.com> References: <200007191921.MAA02986@shorter.eng.sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3us In-Reply-To: <200007191921.MAA02986@shorter.eng.sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: Z > Check http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue3693.txt for the original. It > basically calls for adding > > boolean byte_order > > to struct Encoding. > > This seems reasonable. Except I would probably make it something like > > short byte_order > > with constants: > > BIG_ENDIAN > LITTLE_ENDIAN > DEFAULT > > so when you do not have an opinion the ORB can choose its native > byte_ordering. > > I'd like to include this in the next vote round so please respond > soon. > > Cheers, > Harold -- Matthew Newhook E-Mail: mailto:matthew@ooc.com Software Designer WWW: http://www.ooc.com Object Oriented Concepts, Inc. Phone: (709) 738-3725 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:52:48 -0700 From: Harold Carr X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Newhook CC: Harold Carr , interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory References: <200007191921.MAA02986@shorter.eng.sun.com> <20000719195212.A3630@ooc.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: >+[d9`!Vd9Y4De9BASd9 You should address your question to the person who raised the issue - I do not think they are on the interceptors-ftf mailing list. H Matthew Newhook wrote: > > Hi, > > Actually, I don't like this change. I don't understand the motivation, > and as far as I can see it doesn't solve any worthwhile problem. Why > exactly do you want to be able to write in a defined byte-order? How > is this important? > > Regards, Matthew > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 12:21:52PM -0700, Harold Carr wrote: > > > > Check http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue3693.txt for the original. It > > basically calls for adding > > > > boolean byte_order > > > > to struct Encoding. > > > > This seems reasonable. Except I would probably make it something like > > > > short byte_order > > > > with constants: > > > > BIG_ENDIAN > > LITTLE_ENDIAN > > DEFAULT > > > > so when you do not have an opinion the ORB can choose its native > > byte_ordering. > > > > I'd like to include this in the next vote round so please respond > > soon. > > > > Cheers, > > Harold > > -- > Matthew Newhook E-Mail: mailto:matthew@ooc.com > Software Designer WWW: http://www.ooc.com > Object Oriented Concepts, Inc. Phone: (709) 738-3725 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 20:51:52 -0230 From: Matthew Newhook To: Harold Carr Cc: interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: Issue 3693: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory Message-ID: <20000719205152.E4202@ooc.com> References: <200007191921.MAA02986@shorter.eng.sun.com> <20000719195212.A3630@ooc.com> <39763140.9F2C5592@sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3us In-Reply-To: <39763140.9F2C5592@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: !,J!!1O!"!n You should address your question to the person who raised the issue - I > do not think they are on the interceptors-ftf mailing list. Ok, I'll do that. At this point I'm strongly opposed to this proposal. > H Regards, Matthew -- Matthew Newhook E-Mail: mailto:matthew@ooc.com Software Designer WWW: http://www.ooc.com Object Oriented Concepts, Inc. Phone: (709) 738-3725 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 20:54:40 -0230 From: Matthew Newhook To: Harald Boehme Cc: issues@omg.org, interceptors-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: PI: Bi-endianness of Codec Factory Message-ID: <20000719205440.F4202@ooc.com> References: <3941153F.711C67BE@informatik.hu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3us In-Reply-To: <3941153F.711C67BE@informatik.hu-berlin.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-UIDL: 3m4!!:HG!!S#dd9i+Ae9 Hi, This issue looks like it will come up for voting in the next round of the FTF. I don't understand the use-case. Why exactly do you need to change the byte-order? What benefit is there to able to influence this? How is this applicable to writing Portable ORB services (and the original goal of the PI spec)? There are far more serious issues than simply the byte-ordering anyway... For example, consider wide character sets... Regards, Matthew On Fri, Jun 09, 2000 at 06:03:11PM +0200, Harald Boehme wrote: > For better usability of the coding and symmetry of encoding and > decoding it is nessesary to extend the information for the Codec > selection. The byte order should be selectable in the request for a > Codec. > Rationale: To allow generation of identical encoding values for > the same parameters, it must be possible to select the endianness. > > Proposed Resolution: Extend "struct Encoding" in section 13.7 of > ptc/00-03-03 with an additional field "boolean byte_order". > > Regards, > Harald > -- > <<<< Harald Bvhme, Berlin 12489 >>>> > <<<< Radicke Str. 52 >>>> > <<<< boehme@informatik.hu-berlin.de >>>> -- Matthew Newhook E-Mail: mailto:matthew@ooc.com Software Designer WWW: http://www.ooc.com Object Oriented Concepts, Inc. Phone: (709) 738-3725 Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:10:34 -0230 From: Matthew Newhook To: Harold Carr Cc: interceptors-ftf@omg.org, juergen@omg.org, csi_submitters@concept5.com Subject: Re: Interceptors FTF end game plan Message-ID: <20000724181034.D23005@ooc.com> References: <200007211823.LAA03427@shorter.eng.sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3us In-Reply-To: <200007211823.LAA03427@shorter.eng.sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: `)V!!]6bd9]PC!!iRIe9 Hi Harold, On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 11:23:19AM -0700, Harold Carr wrote: >[...] > 3693 - byte order in encoding I would prefer to see some statement from the originator of this change before we do anything further on this issue... I don't understand the use-case for affecting the byte-order. > [...] > Cheers, > Harold Regards, Matthew -- Matthew Newhook E-Mail: mailto:matthew@ooc.com Software Designer WWW: http://www.ooc.com Object Oriented Concepts, Inc. Phone: (709) 738-3725