[openbeosnetteam] Fw: [openbeos] Development Model?
- From: "Emmanuel Jacobs" <emmanuel.jacobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 10:48:37 +0200
For Information, discussion is taking place on the main list.
Regards,
Emmanuel
PS: I'm CC'ing Scott in this message, Hi ! =-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Mansfield" <thephantom@xxxxxxx>
To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2003 9:55 PM
Subject: [openbeos] Development Model?
> Greetin's all,
>
> As I sit here jamming with some most excellent Sarah Brightman tunes
> whilst coding up the BNetEndpoint class (hi, Philippe!) I find
myself
> in a bit of a quandary and would like to solicit the input of my
fellow
> devs on this list.
>
> First, the problem domain: the fickle nature of TCP socket
> connection(s) means that said connection can change state at any
given
> moment without so much as a cursory "so long, and thanks for all the
> fish." For example, in the BNetEndpoint class one is allowed to
> programatically change any aspect of a live connection which
directly
> effects most aspects of an instance of BNetEndpoint. Said
> behind-the-scenes changes will bubble up into userland with
potential
> adverse side effects.
>
> Next, the quandary: I tend to code using the "contract programming"
> development model as I find it very tolerant to both real-world
> failures as well as pathological cases. I interpret the essence of
> contract programming is that there is a guarantee in place, to wit:
> should "A::method()" fail, the member data of whatever instance of
> class A won't be left in an indeterminate state. As I read the
BeBook,
> in the current incarnation of the BNetEndpoint we basically bail out
of
> a failed connection, leaving whatever instance of BNetEndpoint in an
> indeterminate state -- thus my abhorrant confusion.
>
> I guess that the point of this long-winded obfuscated electronic
> dissertation is twofold in that I don't want to break binary
> compatiblilty with R5 but at the same time I would like to handle
> socket connection failures more gracefully than is implied in the
> BeBook -- lookin' for validation to my madness.
>
> Comments?
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Cheers,
> Scott
>
>
>
Other related posts:
- » [openbeosnetteam] Fw: [openbeos] Development Model?
