[DRMAA-WG] IDL issues
Daniel Gruber
dgruber at univa.com
Wed Jun 22 05:31:28 CDT 2011
Am 22.06.2011 um 10:35 schrieb Andre Merzky:
> 2011/6/22 Daniel Gruber <dgruber at univa.com>:
>>
>
....
>
>> Why is the Monitoring session handled differently, i.e. has no
>> name/open/destroy?
>>
>> Monitoring session have no persistency, so they need no name for opening,
>> and no destruction.
>>
>> If something has a create, I would expect it to have a destroy, too.
>> That might just be me, but semantically those two go together...
>>
>> Anyway, your explanation helps!
>>
>> It is a runtime object, IMHO even a singleton.
>
> If it is a singleton which is already instantiated (e.g. by loading
> the library), then it is being opened, not created?
It's just a name, if this makes it easier to understand,
then we could simply change it to open(). I can't see any
argument against.
Cheers,
Daniel
>
> Anyway, I begin to understand the model - much appreciated... One
> might want to make those things clearer in the spec though, as others
> will likely stumble over similar questions?
>
>
> Cheers, Andre.
>
>
> --
> Nothing is ever easy...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/drmaa-wg/attachments/20110622/f9f837ed/attachment-0001.html
More information about the drmaa-wg
mailing list