f



Re: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues

Hi Arvind,

>> I think you might be seeing a type promotion from octet to long. I
>> just checked and ACE_CDR provides a read_octet and write_octet
>> methods for reading/writing octets.

Right, but Kobi's point (which I believe is correct) is that an octet
is *encoded* into 4 bytes.  The original motivation for this was to
maximize performance on RISC machines, where the alignment was
traditionally 32 bit boundaries.

Take care,

        Doug
-- 
Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt                       Professor and Associate Chair
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science  TEL: (615) 343-8197
Institute for Software Integrated Systems    WEB: www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/~schmidt
Vanderbilt University, Nashville TN, 37203   NET: d.schmidt@vanderbilt.edu

0
Douglas
12/28/2005 7:18:39 PM
comp.soft-sys.ace 20326 articles. 1 followers. marlow.andrew (167) is leader. Post Follow

0 Replies
570 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 9

Reply:

Similar Artilces:

RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues #2
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C60C02.CA0D3950 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, So you're saying that the total size of struct bar on the wire is 24 bytes? I could be wrong, but I don't think so - I think it is 12 bytes. Jeff _____ From: Kobi Cohen-Arazi [mailto:kobi.cohenarazi@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 7:46 PM To: Jeff Parsons Cc: Johnny Willemsen; Krishna, Arvind; tao-users@cs.wustl.edu Subject: Re: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues Hi Jeff, I'm not sure I see the behavior you describes. When marshaling one octet at a time, 4 bytes are marshaled. When marshaling an octet array, one byte per Octet is marshaled. Thanks, Kobi. On 12/28/05, Jeff Parsons <j.parsons@vanderbilt.edu> wrote: Hi, The padding added after marshalin an octet depends on what comes next in the stream. For this struct foo { long one; octet two; long three; }; there will indeed be 4 total bytes used for the octet, since the type that follows it must be aligned to a 4-byte boundary, and we know that the octet marshaling started on a 4-byte boundary because of the previous member. However this is not always the case. For example, struct bar { long one; octet two; octet three; octet four; octet five; long six; }; will use ju...

RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues #2
Prof Schmidt, > Right, but Kobi's point (which I believe is correct) is that an octet > is *encoded* into 4 bytes. The original motivation for this was to > maximize performance on RISC machines, where the alignment was > traditionally 32 bit boundaries. I don't think there is any alignment or padding required for an octet unlike a long. This is what I see in the ACE_CDR (de) marshaling operations. I think you can encode the octet directly into CDR_Stream occupying 1 byte in size. This can be done (as I understand) by: .. write_octet defined on ACE_OutputCDR or .. using the from_octet helper struct Thanks, Arvind ...

RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues #2
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C60C02.4B4663D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm saying that the question can't be answered until the next basic type is marshaled. The padding is always added just before the next item is marshaled (since the next item determines what size boundary we must align to), but it is logically counted as being part of the previous item, at least the way you are wording the original question. Jeff _____ From: Krishna, Arvind [mailto:arvindkr@qualcomm.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 7:40 PM To: Jeff Parsons; Johnny Willemsen; Kobi Cohen-Arazi; tao-users@cs.wustl.edu Subject: RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues Hi Jeff, [....] struct foo { long one; octet two; long three; }; > there will indeed be 4 total bytes used for the octet, since the type that follows > it must be aligned to a 4-byte boundary, and we know that the octet marshaling > started on a 4-byte boundary because of the previous member. However this is > not always the case. So if the struct were: struct foo { long one; octet two; } Then will "two" be 1/4 bytes? I think it will be 1 and always 1. It is while marshaling the long that the ACE_CDR's current alignment is checked to add the appropriate pad...

RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues #2
Hi Jeff, [....]� struct foo { � long one; � octet two; � long three; }; � > there will indeed be 4 total bytes used for the octet, since the type that follows > it must be aligned to a 4-byte boundary, and we know that the octet marshaling > started on a 4-byte boundary because of the previous member. However this is > not always the case. So if the struct were: struct foo { long one; octet two; } Then will "two" be 1/4 bytes? I think it will be 1 and always 1. It is while marshaling the long that the ACE_CDR's current alignment is checked to add the appropriate padding to get it to a four byte boundary right? Am I right and is that what you are saying? Thanks, Arvind ...

RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues #2
Hi, If you marshal a corba sequence of octet then instead of the normal << and >> for each element the methods write_octet_array and read_octet_array on the stream are used, in fact, all corba sequences of basic types to use array methods on the cdr stream. If you handle your own cdr streaming you can of course use these methods also. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ace-users@cse.wustl.edu > [mailto:owner-ace-users@cse.wustl.edu] On Behalf Of Krishna, Arvind > Sent: woensdag 28 december 2005 19:55 > To: Kobi Cohen-Arazi; ace-users@cs.wustl.edu; tao-users@cs.wustl.edu > Subject: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet > Marshaling/Demarshaling issues > > > Hi Kobi, > > >It takes 4 bytes to marshal a single Octet. However, when > marshaling an > array of Octet, it takes a single byte for >every element in > the array. > It seems that Octet is an exception comparing the rest of > primitive data > types. What is >the motivation for that? Is it dictated by an > OMG spec? > > I think you might be seeing a type promotion from octet to > long. I just > checked and ACE_CDR provides a read_octet and write_octet methods for > reading/writing octets. However, if you use the insertion/extraction > operator t...

RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues #2
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C60BE3.C29DC8C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, The padding added after marshalin an octet depends on what comes next in the stream. For this struct foo { long one; octet two; long three; }; there will indeed be 4 total bytes used for the octet, since the type that follows it must be aligned to a 4-byte boundary, and we know that the octet marshaling started on a 4-byte boundary because of the previous member. However this is not always the case. For example, struct bar { long one; octet two; octet three; octet four; octet five; long six; }; will use just 1 byte for each octet, since by the time we get to 'six', we are already aligned to a 4-byte boundary, so no additional padding is necessary. Jeff _____ From: owner-tao-users@cse.wustl.edu [mailto:owner-tao-users@cse.wustl.edu] On Behalf Of Johnny Willemsen Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 1:08 PM To: Krishna, Arvind; Kobi Cohen-Arazi; tao-users@cs.wustl.edu Subject: RE: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues Hi, If you marshal a corba sequence of octet then instead of the normal << and >> for each element the methods write_octet_array and read_octet_array on the stream are used, in fact, all corba sequences of basic types to use array metho...

[ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues
Hi Kobi, >It takes 4 bytes to marshal a single Octet. However, when marshaling an array of Octet, it takes a single byte for >every element in the array. It seems that Octet is an exception comparing the rest of primitive data types. What is >the motivation for that? Is it dictated by an OMG spec? I think you might be seeing a type promotion from octet to long. I just checked and ACE_CDR provides a read_octet and write_octet methods for reading/writing octets. However, if you use the insertion/extraction operator then octet will be type promoted as ACE_CDR does not provide the appropriate << and >> methods. Is this what you are seeing? HTH, Arvind ...

RE: [tao-users] Re: [ace-users] Re: Announcing the release of the new beta (ACE-5.4.10, TAO-1.4.10 and CIAO-0.4.10)
Hi, > > >> We encourage you to download the new beta, use it with your > > >> applications, and let us know soon if you encounter any problems > > >> since we plan to cut the x.5 release by February 28th. > > > > As per Wallace's comments, we have an aggressive schedule > for the x.5 > > release to meet the needs of some major sponsors. If > people can give > > x.4.10 a "test drive" in the next couple of days and report problems > > they encounter we'll try to ensure that we fix any > showstoppers before > > According to bugzilla bug 2323 is not fixed yet. > > http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2323 > > For us it is a show stopper. We use the OCI version which does not > have problems related to this bug but it would be nice to be able to > use the latest version with more fixes. FYI, the reason that this test now fails is because Ossama added several new test cases which wheren't in the test in the past, this uncovered some bugs which according to our information where already there a long time. Johnny "Johnny Willemsen" <jwillemsen@remedy.nl> writes: > > > >> We encourage you to download the new beta, use it with your > > > >> applications, and let us know soon if you encounter any problems > > > >> sinc...

Re: [ace-users] Re: [tao-users] Re: difficulties compling TAO with mingw and msys
Hi, Great, when we get time we will try to upgrade to a newer version of MinGW, but it is still a candidate. Just keep an eye on the scoreboard, when we upgrade you will see it there. As you can see on the scoreboard, there are no issues with the 3.2.3 version Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Leeghwaterstraat 25 2811 DT Reeuwijk The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl "William Lederer" <wgl@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message news:<m3pt4yrtfx.fsf@localhost.localdomain>... > Thanks! > > I followed your advice in your earli...

Re: [ace-users] Re: [tao-users] Re: difficulties compling TAO with mingw and msys #2
Hi, > > Great, when we get time we will try to upgrade to a newer version of MinGW, > > but it is still a candidate. Just keep an eye on the scoreboard, when we > > upgrade you will see it there. As you can see on the scoreboard, there are > > no issues with the 3.2.3 version > > I have run all but a few of the provided tests, and all looks well. We run all ACE tests, no issues there, we are working on the TAO tests, some of the tests are able to freeze our build system > Out of curiosity, what is required for eliminating the > inline/dlli...

RE: [tao-users] RE: [ace-users] XML service configuration no longer works with ACE/TAO 5.4.5/1.4.5
Hi, > > Hi Lothar > > > > > � � ACE VERSION: 5.4.5 > > > > Thanks for using the PRF form. Could you try to find the > problem and send > > us patches to fix this? > > > > Regards, > > > > Johnny Willemsen > > I have no problem committing some time to the problem. I do > however know as > much as nothing about the ACE XML parser and it's recent > changes. It seems to > me that (some) of the recent changes might have caused the > test failures. So > if someone working actively on ACEXML gives me directions I > am willing to > spend my time investigating the problem. I can't remember that work has been done the last months so I am also amazed things broke. Nobody is actively working on it, so I think there are not much directions at this moment. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl On Wednesday 18 May 2005 11:01, Johnny Willemsen wrote: > Hi, > I can't remember that work has been done the last months so I am also > amazed things broke. Nobody is actively working on it, so I think there are > not much directions at this moment. Well, it did definiteley work with 5.4.4. So any changes that broke it must have been made between 5.4.4 and 5.4.5. I also read in the release email of 5.4.5 in the CIAO...

Re: [ace-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues
Hi Kobi, Thanks for using the PRF. >> PRF: >> TAO VERSION: 1.4.6 >> ACE VERSION: 5.4.6 >> >> HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: >> Linux, FC3, 2.6.10 >> >> DOES THE PROBLEM AFFECT: >> EXECUTION? YES >> >> Summary: >> It takes 4 bytes to marshal a single Octet. Right. >> However, when marshaling an array of Octet, it takes a single byte >> for every element in the array. It seems that Octet is an exception >> comparing the rest of primitive data types. Yes, that's correct. >> What is the motivation for that? To avoid wasting any more space than necessary when dealing with sequences/arrays. >> Is it dictated by an OMG spec? Yes, definitely. This type of "optimization" is common. Take care, Doug -- Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt Professor and Associate Chair Electrical Engineering and Computer Science TEL: (615) 343-8197 Institute for Software Integrated Systems WEB: www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/~schmidt Vanderbilt University, Nashville TN, 37203 NET: d.schmidt@vanderbilt.edu ...

[tao-users] RE: [ace-users] ACE/TAO on Solaris 10
Hi, There have been some replies. People do have things working on Solaris and there have been made fixes in ACE/TAO. Could you wait another week or so and try the x.4.8 or try cvs, see http://cvs.doc.wustl.edu Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > Dear list members, > > (I sent this message couple of days ago and am unsure if it > was distributed, > thus re-sending it again. I apologize if you received it more > than once) > > I would like to give feedback regarding availability of > ACE/TAO (versions > 5.4.7 and 1.4.7 respectively) on OpenSolaris (Solaris 10) > Intel platform. > > Sun is selectively releasing source code of the Solaris 10 under an > open-source license. Details of this project and installable Solaris > binaries can be found on here: > http://www.opensolaris.org > > Sun has also released Forte compiler set in binary form to > the OpenSolaris > community. A Quote from their website: "Sun Studio 10 > software is freely > available to participants in the OpenSolaris community for > development on > both OpenSolaris and Solaris[tm] Operating Systems on > SPARC-based systems > and x86-based systems, as well as on Linux." You can get > access to Forte > compilers from the OpenSolaris website as well but you should register...

[tao-users] Re: [ace-users] How to use c++ native exception handling instead of ACE's while building ACE+TAO
Hi, >> My only guess is that all of the libs you are linking in your >> builds were not compiled with a consistent set of options. Right, my recommendation would be to completely blow away your existing ACE+TAO x.5 directory, download a fresh version, and start from a clean slate. It sounds like you may have things lying around from previous build attempts. Thanks, Doug -- Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt Professor and Associate Chair Electrical Engineering and Computer Science TEL: (615) 343-8197 Institute for Software Integrated Systems WEB: www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/~schmidt Vanderbilt University, Nashville TN, 37203 NET: d.schmidt@vanderbilt.edu ...

[tao-users] Re: [ace-users] Re: Query
Hi Bill, Thanks very much for your email. Please make sure to send all questions related to TAO or ACE to the ACE mailing list or ACE+TAO newsgroup, rather than to me directly. > Actually this email is very appropriate. We at The Weather Channel > are attempting to build ACE+TAO version 5.4 on an AMD opteron using > g++ 3.3.3. > > The only errors we have seen thus far and in a component that we don't really > intend on using is: This problem was fixed before the x.4.1 release, so if you download it from http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/Download.html you'll get a wo...

RE: [ace-users] Re: ACE-TAO subesetting
Thanks Don, Yes I do intend to follow up on the material you have alluded to in the mail. And I stumbled upon your contact during some initial reading on this subject. <snip><http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE_wrappers/docs/ACE-subsets.html> Anyone interested in contributing time or funding to these efforts should please contact d.hinton@vanderbilt.edu <snip> /Gaurav -----Original Message----- From: Don Hinton [mailto:don.hinton@vanderbilt.edu] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 10:42 AM To: Gaurav Khanna Cc: ace-users@cs.wustl.edu Subject: [ace-users]...

Re: [ace-users] [tao-users] ACE/TAO ported to Sun Studio 12
Hi, > is this change included in the official release of ACT/TAO (and if yes > since which version)? This change will be part of the upcoming x.6.2 version. I am creating x.6.2 at this moment, when everything runs fine it will be available at the end of today. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl *** Integrated compile and test statistics see http://scoreboard.theaceorb.nl *** *** Commercial service and support for ACE/TAO/CIAO *** *** See http://www.theaceorb.nl/en/support.html *** ...

[ace-users] Re: [tao-users] Re: difficulties compling TAO with mingw and msys
Hi, > Sorry about the wrong PRF file. > > I have been using the -mtune as you can check for further down the > excessively-long compile log; it gets rid of one of the complaints the > compiler has. Ok, I changed that last week, with 3.4 we use -mtune now. >I followed your suggestion regarding the include file and it gets past > the problem. > > However, it seems like such a fundamental include, why does it work on > other envionments (like the linux one that was a full successful > compile for me)? I really don't know, maybe a compile...

[ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Borland Developer Studio 2006 with ACE/TAO
Hi, I'm curious about the current status of ACE/TAO and C++ Builder 2006. Borland shipped the promised fix/update some time ago, but I couldn't find anything about how it works with ACE/TAO. Regards Espen Harlinn ...

[tao-users] RE: [ace-users] Tao_idl core dumps during ACE/TAO build
Hi, Please upgrade to ACE+TAO x.4.7, which you can download from http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/Download.html under the heading "latest beta kit". The DOC groups at Washington University, UC Irvine, and Vanderbilt University only provide "best effort" support for non-sponsors for the latest beta kit, as described in http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE_wrappers/docs/ACE-bug-process.html Thus, if you need more "predictable" help, I recommend that you check out http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/commercial-support.html for a list of companies that will provide you with ACE+TAO commercial support. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > TAO VERSION: 1.4.1 > ACE VERSION: 5.4.1 > > HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: > Dell PowerEdge750, Slackware Linux 10.1.0 > > TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: > COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): > gcc version 3.3.4 > > AREA/CLASS/EXAMPLE AFFECTED: > CosConcurrencyControl.idl failed due to tao_idl core dump > > DOES THE PROBLEM AFFECT: > COMPILATION? Yes > $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h and > $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU > included below > LINKING? No > EXECUTION? No > OTHER (please specify)? No > > SYNOPSIS: > TAO fails to build because tao_...

[tao-users] Re: [ace-users] timestamps incorrect in ACE+TAO .tar.gz
Hi > It has just come to my attention that there are many files in the > ACE+TAO .tar.gz file with timestamps showing '1970-01-05'. Obviously > this is wrong and is the only reason why my packages have been > rejected from Debian ("file(s) with a time stamp too ancient"). > > Is there a possibility that this will be fixed. Or should I just > 'touch' all the problematic files? Could you please run a touch on them? I don't know how this happened. Strange. Opening and fiddling with the distribution would make quite a few things goofy! If ...

[ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Borland Developer Studio 2006 with ACE/TAO #2
Hi, The x.4.8 version of ACE/TAO is supported with BCB2006, we have some linker warnings/errors in some configurations, Borland is working on these for Update2, but these are not causing a problem. See ACE_wrappers/ACE-INSTALL.html for info about how to use it. We deliver also commercial support for using BCB2006 with ACE/TAO. See www.theaceorb.nl for our services. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > -----Original Message----- > From: Espen Harlinn [mailto:espen@harlinn.no] > Sent: donderdag 2 februari 2006 18:06 > To: jwillemsen@remedy.nl > Cc: ace-users@cs.wustl.edu > Subject: RE: [tao-users] Borland Developer Studio 2006 with ACE/TAO > > Hi, > > I'm curious about the current status of ACE/TAO and C++ Builder 2006. > Borland shipped the promised fix/update some time ago, but I > couldn't find > anything about how it works with ACE/TAO. > > Regards > Espen Harlinn > > ...

[ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Borland Developer Studio 2006 with ACE/TAO #2
Hi, See http://www.remedy.nl/en/borland.html for an overview of the supported Borland products with TAO. Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > -----Original Message----- > From: Espen Harlinn [mailto:espen@harlinn.no] > Sent: donderdag 2 februari 2006 18:06 > To: jwillemsen@remedy.nl > Cc: ace-users@cs.wustl.edu > Subject: RE: [tao-users] Borland Developer Studio 2006 with ACE/TAO > > Hi, > > I'm curious about the current status of ACE/TAO and C++ Builder 2006. > Borland shipped the promised fix/update some time ago, but I > couldn't find > anything about how it works with ACE/TAO. > > Regards > Espen Harlinn > > ...

[tao-users] Re: [ace-users] Re: minimum CORBA
Hi, > I have upgraded to ACE.5.4.4 and TAO.1.1.4 and I still have the same > issue. When compiling my IDLs, TAO IDL is generating code that fails to > link because ACE/TAO was compiled with minimum_corba=1. > > Is there a flag/option that needs to be given to TAO IDL when compiling > my IDLs or is there something more to it. Do you use the GNU makefile infrastructure of ACE/TAO for your own project? Try to build one of the TAO tests and compare the compiler switches to your own flags. You should have several compiler flags in your own project. Regards, We recommend you to upgrade to the x.4.4 version which you can obtain from http://deuce.doc.wustl.edu/Download.html ...

Web resources about - Re: [ace-users] RE: [tao-users] Octet Marshaling/Demarshaling issues - comp.soft-sys.ace

Resources last updated: 3/5/2016 10:55:41 AM