oo-dev Inquiry - Interest?

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

I'm posting to determine who in the apr project would 
be interested in a defining a common oo approach to apr
and hosting those efforts in this sphere within apr?

E.g.;

  * an oo-dev@apr.apache.org list, discussing and coming
    to a common approach for exposing apr as an object
    model.

  * a /repos/asf/apr/oo/ tree containing the implementations 
    of this consensus, e.g. c++ wrapper, java org.apache.apr, 
    perl xs bindings, php, python etc.  Perhaps some specific
    threshold, say three individual contributors before a given 
    binding is 'supported', would be useful.

This would obviously be with an invitation to our modperl
user community, since they have the most comprehensive wrapper
thus far, invitations to the other interested groups including
authors of several c++ bindings.

It seems to me this is a universal question with many specific
language solutions, that would best be addressed by the apr
community itself.

Comments?  Interest?

Bill

Re: oo-dev Inquiry - Interest?

[Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 04:26:31PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> This would obviously be with an invitation to our modperl
> user community, since they have the most comprehensive wrapper
> thus far, invitations to the other interested groups including
> authors of several c++ bindings.

FWIW, Subversion already exposes core parts of APR through its SWIG and other
language bindings.  (If you want to write a SVN app in Java, you need to deal
with APR in a Java way.)  -- justin

Re: oo-dev Inquiry - Interest?

[Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Mladen Turk wrote:

> (chop)

I've been mulling over thoughts that might relate to this: modularisation
of apr_util - in the sense of making it a set of APIs impelemented
by loadable dso modules.

The rationale here is to deal with the functionality-vs-bloat dilemma.
There's a lot of apr-extension code floating around: for example apvfs or
apr_http_client, sharing the property of being APR-based and of likely
interest to projects using APR.  Can we accommodate this kind of
extension in the manner of modules for httpd?

> AFAICS the OO effort will need two things:
> 1. Low level interface to a particular OO technology
> 2. High level or abstract interface equal on each
>     technology.
> 3. APR api for loading OO language engine.

If we work towards a modular extensible core, then this becomes one
element of that effort, I think?

-- 
Nick Kew

Re: oo-dev Inquiry - Interest?

[Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

 > I'm posting to determine who in the apr project would be interested 
in a defining a common oo approach to apr
 > and hosting those efforts in this sphere within apr?
 >
 >
 > Comments?  Interest?
 >

Well, as you might already know I'm more then interested :) .
There is already an effort integrating small subset of Java
interface to APR:
http://www.apache.org/~mturk/apr-java.tar.gz
Also back in '03, I wrote an cpp interface for APR
that was meant to be used for next generation JK3 connector
written in CPP, but the idea was not accepted.
http://www.apache.org/~mturk/apr-cpp.zip

AFAICS the OO effort will need two things:
1. Low level interface to a particular OO technology
2. High level or abstract interface equal on each
    technology.
3. APR api for loading OO language engine.

Most of this exists to some extent but is scattered across
various ASF projects.
For example perl developers have a code to load the engine,
as well couple of commons/daemon project have that for Java.
mod_aspdotnet has something similar too.
IMHO this would be a good starting point to bring the
effort to life.

Regards,
Mladen.

Re: oo-dev Inquiry - Interest?

[jean-frederic clere <jf...@fujitsu-siemens.com>]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> I'm posting to determine who in the apr project would 
> be interested in a defining a common oo approach to apr
> and hosting those efforts in this sphere within apr?
> 
> E.g.;
> 
>   * an oo-dev@apr.apache.org list, discussing and coming
>     to a common approach for exposing apr as an object
>     model.
> 
>   * a /repos/asf/apr/oo/ tree containing the implementations 
>     of this consensus, e.g. c++ wrapper, java org.apache.apr, 
>     perl xs bindings, php, python etc.  Perhaps some specific
>     threshold, say three individual contributors before a given 
>     binding is 'supported', would be useful.
> 
> This would obviously be with an invitation to our modperl
> user community, since they have the most comprehensive wrapper
> thus far, invitations to the other interested groups including
> authors of several c++ bindings.
> 
> It seems to me this is a universal question with many specific
> language solutions, that would best be addressed by the apr
> community itself.
> 
> Comments?  Interest?

+1 for the java part.

Cheers

Jean-Frederic

> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
>