W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Questions about CCXML and CCXML interpreter

From: Werner Dittmann <Werner.Dittmann@t-online.de>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 21:29:42 +0200
Message-ID: <006301c4976c$85887030$0100a8c0@nonehome>
To: "Jay Anantharaman" <jay@versay.com>
Cc: <www-voice@w3c.org>


well, one of the most driving forces behind my work was:
my C++ know how is quite "rusty" :-).  (I used to work with
C since about '82, with C++ since '89 but I stopped 
programming with C++ in '95/'96). Also I was interested
to have a simple and easy protable software to various systems.

Well, I didn't do any real stress test with the stuff. I only use
a small network simulator just now. If my time permits I'll
try to connect to some sort of JAIN interface, JAIN-SIP maybe.

During the rebase I figured out that many things are much easier
in Java than in C++. Somtimes because the String handling is easier,
somtimes because Java has a real "root Object" that allows
to use queues, map etc quite easily. The code size is much smaller
(measured in lines of code). Also the supporting libraries are
quite robust, easy to get, often in binary format (independent of
the underlying system). For example, I use the Mozilla Rhino
implementation for ECMA script - even without any prior
knowledge of Rhino embedding it was a matter of just hours
to have to first embedding up and running. Similar for the
XML interfaces (SAX2, Xerces)

Also the built-in threads simplify handling quite a lot. The code is
much cleaner I believe, thus easier to read and to maintain. Because
of its base (the C++ implementation) some things a not yet really 
"Java alike" and the is some more room for simpler coding and
to streamline

Due to my experience with C, C++, and Java it's much simpler
to bring a Java implementation to a new system then C/C++ based
implementations (except for "Hello, world" :-)  ). I personally
had quite some trouble to bring up the C++ implementation
of the CCXML interpreter.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jay Anantharaman" <jay@versay.com>
To: "'Werner Dittmann'" <Werner.Dittmann@t-online.de>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 6:34 PM
Subject: RE: Questions about CCXML and CCXML interpreter

> Hi Werner,
> You might want to check out http://sourceforge.net
> and see if it meets your needs.
> Out of curiosity ...
> How does the Java version perform under load when
> compared to the C++ version?
> What benefits do you see for using the Java version when
> compared to the C++ version?
> Thanks.
> -Jay
> ------------
> Jay Anantharaman
> VP, Technology
> Versay Solutions, LLC
> 888-689-4934
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-voice-request@w3.org [mailto:www-voice-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Werner Dittmann
> > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 3:30 AM
> > To: www-voice@w3c.org
> > Subject: Questions about CCXML and CCXML interpreter
> > 
> > 
> > All,
> > 
> > based on and strongly influenced by the Phonologies opensource CCXML
> C++
> > implementation I developed
> > a Java based version of the CCXML interpreter. The Java implementation
> > currently supports almost all features
> > of the C++ version. The Java implementation was done with J2SDK 1.4.2
> and
> > uses Apache/Jakarta software,
> > such as Junit, log4j, commons httpclient, Xerces as supporting
> libraries.
> > 
> > Because I would like to put this work in public domain I appreciate
> any
> > comments which license to use:
> > -GPL, BSD, Apache, is there a W3C license for publice
> domain/opensource SW?
> > 
> > Any ideas where to place the software as opensource?
> > 
> > Ideas, comments, etc. are appreciated.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Werner
> > 
> > mailto:Werner.Dittmann@t-online.de
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
Received on Friday, 10 September 2004 19:27:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:37 UTC