[SAGA-RG] python bindings

[Daniel S. Katz]

On Sep 3, 2011, at 6:21 AM, M.A. Santcroos wrote:

> Hi Sylvain,
> 
> On 9/2/11 10:40 , "Sylvain Reynaud" <Sylvain.Reynaud at in2p3.fr> wrote:
>> Andre, I think you're right about the reason for the create() method ;
>> it can indeed return a Task object that will contain the created object.
> 
> I don't really understand that. So how does that differ from the LSU
> functionality?
> 
>> Mark, FYI you can configure JSAGA's "local://" adaptor to be mapped to
>> URL scheme "fork://"... but anyway, there are many other differences
>> between URL of various SAGA implementations (independently of the
>> implemented binding). The other main difference between SAGA
>> implementations is between the security contexts.
> 
> How come? Was there too much room for interpretation in the spec?
> 
>> So if you want to develop an application that uses several SAGA
>> implementations, creating URLs and security contexts will require
>> implementation-specific code anyway.
> 
> I don't consider that a feature obviously.
> It kind of defeats the purpose of having a standard API.

Yes, this bothered me too.

Dan

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark
> 
> --
> saga-rg mailing list
> saga-rg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/saga-rg


-- 
Daniel S. Katz
University of Chicago
(773) 834-7186 (voice)
(773) 834-6818 (fax)
d.katz at ieee.org or dsk at ci.uchicago.edu
http://www.ci.uchicago.edu/~dsk/




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/saga-rg/attachments/20110907/732e2e91/attachment.html