[DRMAA-WG] Java Language Bindings 1.0 Candidate 2

[Daniel Templeton]

Peter,

I thought that we had also agreed that there should be some text 
explicitly discussing what happens (or is not guaranteed to happen) when 
a control(SESSION_ALL) call fails.  I don't see that in the control() 
method description.

Daniel

Daniel Templeton wrote:
> Peter,
>
> You are not wrong about the DRMAA_ERRNO_NO_MORE_ELEMENTS being only for 
> non-object-oriented language-without-native-lists bindings.  The IDL 
> spec should, however, include enough detail to make it possible to 
> generate the various other language bindings, including the non-OO 
> bindings.  (The reference to the error in the Java spec it to say that 
> is has no mapping.)
>
> OK.  Now I'm confused.  I just looked through the latest IDL spec, and I 
> no longer see the references to what to do when your language doesn't 
> have exceptions or what to do when your language is not introspective.  
> Has the IDL spec become the OO, introspective IDL spec, i.e the C#/Java 
> spec?
>
> Daniel
>
> Peter Troeger wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>>   
>>     
>>> I have discovered a couple of errors in the 0.7.1 spec, mostly  
>>> related to exceptions.  I also added a separate table for  
>>> correlating IDL exceptions to Java exceptions.  Hopefully I have  
>>> now also completely removed all uses of the old (pre-0.4) naming  
>>> from the spec.
>>>     
>>>       
>> Great. I also got some feedback for IDL spec from HPI people, but  
>> mostly regarding formulations. I will release the final document  
>> after christmas, if there are no more issues found by somebody else  
>> on the list.
>>
>>   
>>     
>>> There is now one open issue that I will need to resolve with  
>>> Peter.  I believe that we agreed to add a NoMoreElementsException  
>>> to the IDL spec to be thrown from the cursor functions instead of  
>>> InvalidArgumentException when the iterator is exhausted.  I do not,  
>>> however, see that error code listed in the currect IDL spec, and I  
>>> can't get to the tracker site at the moment to confirm my  
>>> recollection.  For now, the Java spec references this missing error  
>>> code.  If it turns out that I am misremembering the decision  
>>> regarding this error code, I will remove the reference before I  
>>> make the Java spec final.
>>>     
>>>       
>> I am somehow confused. I thought the NO_MORE_ELEMENTS error is only  
>> needed for the string vector helper functions in the C binding. Java  
>> and friends have native vector types, so there is simply no need for  
>> the helper functions, and therefore also no need for this error.  
>> Right ?!?
>>
>> Peter.
>> --
>>   drmaa-wg mailing list
>>   drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg
>>   
>>     
>
> --
>   drmaa-wg mailing list
>   drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg
>