[DRMAA-WG] IDL issues

[Daniel Gruber]

Am 22.06.2011 um 10:35 schrieb Andre Merzky:

> 2011/6/22 Daniel Gruber <dgruber at univa.com>:
>> 
> 
....
> 
>>     Why is the Monitoring session handled differently, i.e. has no
>>    name/open/destroy?
>> 
>> Monitoring session have no persistency, so they need no name for opening,
>> and no destruction.
>> 
>> If something has a create, I would expect it to have a destroy, too.
>> That might just be me, but semantically those two go together...
>> 
>> Anyway, your explanation helps!
>> 
>> It is a runtime object, IMHO even a singleton.
> 
> If it is a singleton which is already instantiated (e.g. by loading
> the library), then it is being opened, not created?

It's just a name, if this makes it easier to understand, 
then we could simply change it to open(). I can't see any 
argument against.

Cheers,
Daniel

> 
> Anyway, I begin to understand the model - much appreciated...  One
> might want to make those things clearer in the spec though, as others
> will likely stumble over similar questions?
> 
> 
> Cheers, Andre.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Nothing is ever easy...

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/drmaa-wg/attachments/20110622/f9f837ed/attachment-0001.html