celix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Broekhuis <a.broekh...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Native-OSGi] Usage of arrays vs collections
Date Tue, 05 Jun 2012 07:49:45 GMT
Hi,


> >
> > How do we want to solve this? I don't know of any standard C library, and
> > what about C++?
>
> C++ has C++ Standard Library (STD), which contains arrays, queues,
> maps, etc and is - if i am correct - part of the C++ standard.
> Because C does not have this, I think the purposed solution is a good one.
>

For most parts this will work, basically I will try to follow the OSGi spec
and use an array where it also uses one.

But...

>
> An other option is to make the needed C collections part of the OSGi
> API. Which has the advantages that we can use linked arrays, hash
> maps, etc. The drawback is that we impose a API for something which is
> clearly not part of OSGi.
>

For certain cases something like this is needed, for example for the bundle
headers or service properties. The OSGi spec uses a dictionary for these
cases (which is obsolete and replaced by the Map interface).
Also Enumeration is used quite often. At the moment there is no alternative
for this one in Celix.

Heaving these as part of Native-OSGi isn't a problem as far as I am
concerned. For Java it isn't needed, because it is part of the Java runtime
itself. For C there isn't such thing, so we either have to use an existing
library, or provide something ourselves.
Since I don't know of any library, I think the later case makes most sense.

Sascha: What makes sense for C++?


>
> Greetings,
> Pepijn
>



-- 
Met vriendelijke groet,

Alexander Broekhuis

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message