[TUSCANY-1366] C++ SDO spec portability: SDORuntimeException off-spec member functions

• Type: Improvement
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Fixed
• Affects Version/s: Cpp-M3
• Component/s: C++ SDO, C++ Specification
• Environment: portability issue -- all platforms
• Assignee: Unassigned
• Reporter: Michael Yoder
• Created: 22/Jun/07 03:04
• Updated: 17/Jan/10 23:11
• Resolved: 29/Aug/07 14:58

Description

Tuscany C++ SDO specification class SDORuntimeException has off-spec member functions used by SCA (shown in the e-mail thread below). It would seem that for portability these should be taken internal to Tuscany SDO, or submitted to the spec committee.

----Original Message----
From: Michael Yoder
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:37 PM
To: '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: C++ SDO spec compliance/portability: SDORuntimeException

Thanks Pete,

Yes, these issues I am putting together and posting came up when doing a portability study using HydraSDO to build Tuscany SCA. Since the SDO spec is separate from SCA, we were thinking this would be a good goal. That seems to mean making them internal to Tuscany SDO or taking them to the committee.

Michael

----Original Message----
From: Pete Robbins [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 9:02 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: C++ SDO spec compliance/portability: SDORuntimeException

Michael,

An interesting set of questions! I'm not convinced that adding methods to the spec api classes is a compliance issue (in fact it may be impossible to implement without modifying the spec apis ... constructors etc.) but it could be a portability issue if it is not clear that the methods are implementation specific.

The methods below are added so that an SDORuntimeException can contain a "stack" of locations indicating where it was thrown/rethrown etc.. These are only used within the Tuscany implementation so I guess could be moved to protected and make the classes that use them friends?? I'm not sure how useful these are anyway but the exception class pre-dates it being used for SDORuntimeException.

There are also methods to allow simple streaming:

catch(SDORuntimeException& e)
{
cout << e;
}

I like the simplicity of this but I guess we could write an SDOUtils method to do something similar instead.

I'm not sure if any of these should be mandated by the specification.

Cheers,

On 21/06/07, Michael Yoder <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The Tuscany SDO C++ class SDORuntimeException has these public member
> functions which do not appear in the C++ 2.1 specification:
>
>
> SDO_API severity_level getSeverity() const; SDO_API void
> setSeverity(severity_level sev); SDO_API void setMessageText(const
> std::string& msg_text); SDO_API void setExceptionLocation(const
> std::string& file,
> unsigned long line,
> const std::string& function="");
> SDO_API void setLocation(const std::string& file,
> unsigned long line,
> const std::string& function="");
>
> SDO_API void trace(const std::string& text="%1:\n %3 %4 %2");
>
> SDO_API virtual ostream& PrintSelf(ostream &os) const; SDO_API friend
> ostream& operator<< (ostream &os, const SDORuntimeException &except);
>
>
> What's the rational behind these additional member functions? Would it
> be appropriate to file a bug to have them removed from the public API?
> Or alternatively a bug for them to be submitted to the spec committee?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Yoder
> Software Developer
> Rogue Wave Software
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [e-mail]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [e-mail]
>
>

–
Pete