Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

Ralph Lange <[email protected]> · Tue, 13 Sep 2005 10:23:05 +0200

Kay-Uwe Kasemir wrote:

[...]

I think this means that V4 needs to include a generic type description
interface ala EpicsDataDescriptor.

Yes.

I also understand that a EPICS V4 database implementation is easier
to do with a  list of BasicType/DbfType enums.

Does it make sense to offer both?
Can the data interface that one gets from EPICS V4 include
    BasicType getBasicType();
but also getDataCharacter()  [ boolen, integer, real, ...],
getBitsize(), ...

Any implementation can use an enumerated list of types - the implementor

is certainly free to use what's easy and appropriate.

What is the advantage of putting that implementation internal thing into

the published interface?

Does the server side implementation have any reason to have it in the

interface?

Can a client side implementation profit from an enumerated type? Would

it have to include a header file of the server implementation to use it?

Wouldn't that destroy the clean separation between server and client side?

Putting both types of description in the inteface introduces redundancy

and cross-dependencies, which would have to be well-justified. I don't

see any justification yet.

I suggest to stick with the functional descriptor interface and leave

enumerated lists of types to the implementations.

See you later,
Ralph

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System