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: event admin headers
Date Wed, 14 Aug 2013 05:50:19 GMT

2013/8/13 Erik Jansman <Erik@jansman.eu>

> Hello all,
> That was a lot of feedback to read :).

You're welcome! Don't see it as complaints and/or disagreement. I think
this shows that people care for Celix and an EventAdmin implementation,
which is a good thing imho!

I am working on the private headers with the function declarations. I
> didn't think they would contribute to the discussion so i have left them
> out. But I will have a look at the formatting and naming in the header
> files. only in the constants I am unsure what to do with those since they
> are part of the spec (113.12.5 public interface EventConstants).

I think this is one of the parts where we (the Native-OSGi guys) have to
come up with a clever solution. Most likely it will be something like a
prefix for all those constants. Much like we already do for several other
constant values (or enums). For example the enum BundleState has
BUNDLE_ACTIVE while the spec says that the class Bundle has a field ACTIVE.
Again in these cases try to follow the mapping, ie class Bundle has field
ACTIVE, so Celix has BUNDLE_ACTIVE. One small note, in Celix I used an
enum, while in Java it is a static field (I assume this is because there
was no enum in java before 1.5).
For the EventAdmin constants it then can be something like

Anyway, in this case I think Celix is more leading then the spec, since not
doing something like this might be a issue in use.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Alexander Broekhuis

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