Re: Code generation or forms?

On 2 Jun 2005, at 21:11, Mark Baker wrote:
>> Why would this be in any way different? Whether you generate code at
>> development time or interpret it at runtime shouldn't make a
>> difference. The more information the description contains, the more
>> meaningful you can interpret it or generate code from it.
> I've gone back and forth on this issue for a while.  What I think my
> biggest concern boils down to is that there's a lot of, for example,
> existing HTTP libraries which are very mature, stable, and highly
> optimized.

and there are a lot which are incomplete and full of bugs and
work-rounds and optimisations for bugs in particular in well known

> If a description language came along which included
> information targetted for code generation which overlapped in scope
> with code already within these libraries, then they will be
> incompatible, and the library in need of change to support the
> description language.  Not a good thing ... unless you're an ISV trying
> to reduce competition with open source alternatives by decommoditizing
> this part of the stack, I guess 8-).

i don't understand how this relates to code-generation, how messages
are produced and consumed is essentially looking 'behind the curtain'.

> That's not to say I'm against supporting code generation entirely, only
> that I think each proposed feature will need to be examined closely 
> from
> this POV.

OK, agreed!

> If I had my way though, we'd be starting out from the assumption that
> all information in the language is for runtime consumption.

Is that because the service is likely to change in an incompatible way
between a description being read and used to communicate with the 

In which case all that assumption does is shorten this window of
failure. Or maybe i'm missing your point here.

> In fact, I
> wonder why that isn't the default position of this group, since the Web
> currently works just fine in this manner, and I know from experience
> that you don't need a description language(*) to develop very large
> (international scale) machine-to-machine solutions.

'Generating' code, agents, validators, test forms, documentation, 
whatever seem to be very interesting uses for a formal description.

>  (*) you do need a forms language though

you could still generate code from forms, though unless
there is some indication of the content of responses you
might expect, or negotiate, it's not that useful.


Received on Saturday, 4 June 2005 08:45:28 UTC