Hi Matt, I don't know what you mean. That for every class we should provide an abstract interface? Maybe you should talk to people who sell air (i.e. a bunch of empty interfaces), we are not in that business. Our interfaces are in the $ROOTSYS/include directory. If you want to extend the behaviour of a class, derive from it and override the methods you want. I doubt that you would want to rewrite everything because that is what you have to do if we would only provide abstract interfaces. Another more important point is that every major experiment nowadays seems to want to write their own unique insulation layer to separate themselves from any third party package (even if that package originated and is controlled by their own HEP community). A collaboration wants to have full control over this layer because in that way they feel they are independent of the thrid parties. This indepence is needed because they might have to modify the layer to be able to accommodate another third party package. If we would provide our own abstract layer, then still experiments would write their own private layer to be independent from our layer. This would result in layer on layer before reaching the real code. So we provide working code, you provide your own insulation layer (i.e. abstract interface). Everybody happy. However, if you feel that some of our classes are not complete and need to be extended please feel free to let us know so we can try to fix the ommissions. Or better, provide the missing code. Cheers, Fons. On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 10:15:07AM -0700, Matthew D. Langston wrote: > Hi Suzanne, > > Thank you for your post. I believe you bring up a very important point. > > We (ROOT users and developers) would benefit tremendously if we had an > interface to the ROOT libraries which was separate from the implementation. > It would allow for the possibility to develop third party libraries and > applications. > > So, may I ask the ROOT Team what are the plans for providing an interface to > the ROOT libraries? Could we expect this for ROOT 3.0? If so, maybe the > ROOT Team would consider soliciting feedback from the ROOT community on what > the interface requirements would be? > > Cheers, Matt > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Suzanne Panacek" <spanacek@fnal.gov> > To: "Matthew D. Langston" <langston@SLAC.Stanford.EDU>; > <KOSU_FOKIN@garbo.lucas.lu.se>; <roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch> > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 9:03 AM > Subject: Re: [ROOT] ROOT, Java and remote script execution > > > > We could also design our own parallel Java classes that would also be > labor > > intensive and almost impossible to maintain (who can keep step with Rene > and > > Fons?). We could limit the number of classes we implement since now the > > dependencies between the ROOT libraries are clearly identified. > -- Org: CERN, European Laboratory for Particle Physics. Mail: 1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland E-Mail: Fons.Rademakers@cern.ch Phone: +41 22 7679248 WWW: http://root.cern.ch/~rdm/ Fax: +41 22 7677910
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 11:50:34 MET