[SAGA-RG] Emailing: saga_sd.dvi

[Fisher, SM (Steve)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andre Merzky [mailto:andre at merzky.net] 
> Sent: 06 March 2008 16:47
> To: Fisher, SM (Steve)
> Cc: Andre Merzky; saga-rg at ggf.org
> Subject: Re: Emailing: saga_sd.dvi
> 
> Looks great to me!

Thanks

> 
> One minor thingie:  SIDL allows actually for default
> parameters, so instead of
> 
>       list_services (in  string     service_filter,
>                      in  string     data_filter,
>                      in  string     vo_filter,
>                      out array<service_description> services);
>                         
>       list_services (in  string     service_filter,
>                      in  string     data_filter,
>                      out array<service_description> services);   
> 
> you could write
> 
>       list_services (in  string     service_filter,
>                      in  string     data_filter,
>                      in  string     vo_filter = "",
>                      out array<service_description> services);
> 
> That would keep it consistent with the detailed spec, where
> you list only the long version (and rightly so).

Where is this desribed please. I have been looking at
https://computation.llnl.gov/casc/components/docs/users_guide/

Where looking at the JAVACC grammar in
https://computation.llnl.gov/casc/components/docs/users_guide/node351.ht
ml

It says:

/**
 * Parse a SIDL argument.  Arguments begin with an optional copy
modifier
 * followed by in, out, or inout followed by a type and a formal
argument.
 * The argument is returned on the top of the argument stack.  This
routine
 * also checks that the copy modifier is used only for symbol objects.
For
 * all other types, copy is redundant.
 */
Argument ::= [ <T_COPY> ] ( <T_IN> | <T_OUT> | <T_INOUT> ) 
	 (Type Identifier | Rarray)


I want to make it quite clear in the spec that we are not saying that
the vo_filter has a default value of "" - which is what this notation
looks like for Python fans but that it can be omitted altogether!

Steve

> 
> I think we agreed at OGF22 that we would not need another
> call on the mailing list, as we seem to have group agreement
> since quite some time.  So, yes, I think its good to go to
> the Editor.
> 
> Thanks!!! :-))
> 
> Best, Andre.
>                         
> 
> Quoting [Fisher, SM (Steve)] (Mar 06 2008):
> > Subject: Emailing: saga_sd.dvi
> > From: "Fisher, SM (Steve)" <S.M.Fisher at rl.ac.uk>
> > To: Andre Merzky <andre at merzky.net>
> > Cc: saga-rg at ggf.org
> > 
> >  <<saga_sd.dvi>> Andre,
> > 
> > At last I have made the requested changes to the SD spec. 
> Does anybody
> > object to it going for public comment now?
> > 
> > Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "We've got too much time to waste to stand around here doing things."
>                                                              - Tigger
>