home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!dove!swe.ncsl.nist.gov!kuhn
- From: kuhn@swe.ncsl.nist.gov (Rick Kuhn)
- Newsgroups: comp.sw.components
- Subject: Re: SE and EE components
- Message-ID: <6861@dove.nist.gov>
- Date: 12 Nov 92 14:37:01 GMT
- References: <1992Nov10.042818.11581@latcs1.lat.oz.au>
- Sender: news@dove.nist.gov
- Lines: 38
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
-
- Jason M Baragry (baragry@latcs1.lat.OZ.AU) wrote:
- :
-
- ..
-
-
- :
- :
- : Also, the notion of predefined and understood functionality of components
- : seems to be an important factor in engineering design. Are there plans for
- : standardizing the functionality of software components rather than the interfaces
- : to them?
- :
-
- Yes, notably the POSIX standards, which standardize both the interface
- and software component functionality. Unfortunately the word
- "interface" has different meanings. Most of the writing about open
- system standards, including my own, says that the standards simply
- define "an interface rather than an implementation". But in this case,
- "interface" means both the function call syntax and a complete
- behavioral description. POSIX standards are now required to define a
- language independent specification (LIS), which defines standard
- functionality. The LIS is then mapped to a call syntax for particular
- programming languages (actually just C in almost all cases).
-
- Any component that provides the specified behavior through the
- specified call syntax meets the requirements of the standard. This use
- of the term interface is contrasted with a standard "implementation",
- which would mean standardizing on a particular collection of source or
- executable programs. It is unfortunate that the word "interface" has
- become overloaded in this way.
-
- --
-
- Rick Kuhn Telephone: +1 301 975 3337
- Natl Institute of Standards & Technology Fax: +1 301 590 0932
- Technology Bldg. B266 Internet: kuhn@nist.gov
- Gaithersburg, Md. 20899 USA DRKuhn@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
-