Hello,
I must say that I strongly agree with most of Jeff's arguments. (Maybe
not so much the 'unsigned' story, but practically everything else).
I am astonished that we have this kind of discussion again. I may be
mistaken but I had the impression that it was agreed upon to use DA for
IOC internal acess to records and to abandon the efforts Marty started
to define internal implementation of epics types until we have got the
interfaces right. And that dbd definitions should be compiled into
C/C++ code implementing DA interfaces, views, etc.pp.
If indeed DA does not suffice as a (the) generic interface to record
fields, as Andrew suggested, then maybe DA should be extended or
revised accordingly?
Ben
- Replies:
- Re: Fundamental Types document Marty Kraimer
- References:
- RE: Fundamental Types document Jeff Hill
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: V4 Data Types: Request for tagged unions Benjamin Franksen
- Next:
Re: V4 Data Types: Request for tagged unions Benjamin Franksen
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
<2005>
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
RE: Fundamental Types document Jeff Hill
- Next:
Re: Fundamental Types document Marty Kraimer
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
<2005>
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|