Issue 5937: 'local executor mapping' (components-ftf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: @@ It seems to me that generating 'local executor mapping' for supported
   by a component interfaces is not needed. Even though spec doesn't say
   directly that it's needed or not there are plenty of examples where it is
   shown generated.



@@ According to the spec the following IDL is valid


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     provides I i;
   };


   while this is not:


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     uses I i;
   };


   Any reason for that?


@@ According to the spec Home cannot be forward-declared. Any reason 
   for that?



@@ The following CIDL is legal according to the spec:


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     provides I i;
   };


   home H manages C
   {
   };


   composition session Impl
   {
     home executor H_Exec
     {
       implements H;
       manages C_Exec;
     };
   };


   However there is no way to generate valid local executor mapping for this
   CIDL. The resolution would be to require all forward-declared interfaces
   used by component's provides declarations to be defined before composition
   for this component is seen. I.e. the following CIDL would be a corrected
   version:


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     provides I i;
   };


   home H manages C
   {
   };


   interface I {};


   composition session Impl
   {
     home executor H_Exec
     {
       implements H;
       manages C_Exec;
     };
   };


@@ The following legal according to the spec IDL:


  module M
  {
    module Components
    {
      struct EnterpriseComponent {};
    };


    component C {};
  };


  would result in local executor mapping that looks something like this:


  module M
  {
    module Components
    {
      struct EnterpriseComponent {};
    };


    component C {};
  };


  module M
  {
    local interface  C : Components::EnterpriseComponent {};
  };


  which is illegal IDL. The resolution would be to require names like
  Components::EnterpriseComponent to be fully qualified e.g.
  ::Components::EnterpriseComponent.

Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
May 7, 2003: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 19:10:26 -0500 
From: Boris Kolpackov <boris@isis-server.isis.vanderbilt.edu> 
To: issues@omg.org, components-rtf@omg.org 
Cc: boris@isis-server.isis.vanderbilt.edu, 
   Jeffrey Parsons <parsons@cs.wustl.edu>, Nanbor Wang <nanbor@cse.wustl.edu> 
Subject: CCM spec clarifications/issues 
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i 
X-Mailer: mutt 
X-Uptime: 5 days 
X-URL: http://www.kolpackov.net/ 
X-Accept-Language: en, ru 
X-Location: USA, TN, Nashville 


Good day,


@@ It seems to me that generating 'local executor mapping' for supported
   by a component interfaces is not needed. Even though spec doesn't say
   directly that it's needed or not there are plenty of examples where it is
   shown generated.



@@ According to the spec the following IDL is valid


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     provides I i;
   };


   while this is not:


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     uses I i;
   };


   Any reason for that?


@@ According to the spec Home cannot be forward-declared. Any reason 
   for that?



@@ The following CIDL is legal according to the spec:


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     provides I i;
   };


   home H manages C
   {
   };


   composition session Impl
   {
     home executor H_Exec
     {
       implements H;
       manages C_Exec;
     };
   };


   However there is no way to generate valid local executor mapping for this
   CIDL. The resolution would be to require all forward-declared interfaces
   used by component's provides declarations to be defined before composition
   for this component is seen. I.e. the following CIDL would be a corrected
   version:


   interface I;
   component C
   {
     provides I i;
   };


   home H manages C
   {
   };


   interface I {};


   composition session Impl
   {
     home executor H_Exec
     {
       implements H;
       manages C_Exec;
     };
   };


@@ The following legal according to the spec IDL:


  module M
  {
    module Components
    {
      struct EnterpriseComponent {};
    };


    component C {};
  };


  would result in local executor mapping that looks something like this:


  module M
  {
    module Components
    {
      struct EnterpriseComponent {};
    };


    component C {};
  };


  module M
  {
    local interface  C : Components::EnterpriseComponent {};
  };


  which is illegal IDL. The resolution would be to require names like
  Components::EnterpriseComponent to be fully qualified e.g.
  ::Components::EnterpriseComponent.



thanks,
-boris