Re: DOM Level 3 comments

"Martin v. Loewis" wrote:
> Use of enum typedefs. Level 3 uses typedefs like
> 
> typedef enum _DocumentOrder {
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_PRECEDING,
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_FOLLOWING,
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_SAME,
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_UNORDERED
>                     };
>                  DocumentOrder;
> 
> I don't know whether these typedefs are deprecated as anonymous types
> in CORBA 2.4.1 (probably they are not), however, I cannot see
> rationale for the two names of the type (_DocumentOrder and DocumentOrder).
> (In addition, the semicolon is superfluous).
> 
> Instead, why not simply write
> 
> enum DocumentOrder {
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_PRECEDING,
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_FOLLOWING,
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_SAME,
>                       DOCUMENT_ORDER_UNORDERED
>                     };
> 
> In a CORBA sense, that creates an alias typecode, which is a real
> overhead in some applications. The only rationale I can find is that
> in C, you'd rather write DocumentOrder instead of "enum
> DocumentOrder".

Fixed the enum as you recommended.

> To me, DocumentOrder.DOCUMENT_ORDER_PRECEDING is much cleaner than
> writing Node3.DOCUMENT_ORDER_PRECEDING; it is immaterial whether Node3
> is a separate interface or not.

We considered this solution but we didn't see enough reason to change
the current proposal. Note that the current DOM C bindings are not
following the OMG IDL mapping (they tried but it was overkilled. there is
an email on this in the archives).

Philippe