Re: [ptp-dev] Need new attribute type

[Dave Wootton <dwootton@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Randy
I'm not quite sure I follow your suggestion. What I have is a single PE 
option which has the format mmm,nnn. This appears in the GUI as a single 
Text widget which the user fills in in this form. (I suppose I could also 
have two separate Text fields to contain the two parts of the field).  It 
also gets passed back to the proxy in this form.

Is what you are suggesting is that the proxy create two attribute 
definitions, one for each part, named say, ATTR_PART_A and ATTR_PART_B, 
then use those two attribute definitions to perform validations for each 
of the components of the option?

I think that would work for me, and also solves the second part of my 
validation problem where an option can have a value that can either be one 
of an enumerated set or an integer with range limits.

In that case, in order for my validation to be correct, I would have a 
definite need for a LONG attribute definition event or a BIGINTEGER 
attribute definition event.

Dave



"Randy M. Roberts" <rsqrd@xxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: ptp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
06/21/2007 12:00 PM
Please respond to
Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>


To
ptp-dev <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: [ptp-dev] Need new attribute type






Dave,

Since the field is nnn,mmm, couldn't you present
it as two fields, nnn and mmm, with a "," label between
them?  Then you could verify the nnn and the mmm separately.

R^2

On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 09:09 -0400, Dave Wootton wrote:
> Greg
> At the moment, I don't have a specific need for > 32 bit integer 
support. 
> The one attribute that can be > 32 bit integer has the format nnn,mmm 
> where mmm can be > 32 bits. So it doesn't fit the model of a simple 
> integer attribute, and I have to figure out how to validate it 
otherwise. 
> At the moment, this is one case where I have to hard code the validation 

> ranges in the gui code.
> 
> We may need larger integers for LL, but we aren't sure yet. Our specific 

> need is for 32 bit and 64 bit integers but have no objection to a more 
> general BigInteger implementation.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> Sent by: ptp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 06/20/2007 06:15 PM
> Please respond to
> Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> To
> Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> Re: [ptp-dev] Need new attribute type
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could implement this as a BigInteger (i.e. arbitrary precision 
> integer). When the attribute definition is created, you would specify 
> the precision which would be fixed from then on. That might help with 
> the validation?
> 
> Greg
> 
> On Jun 20, 2007, at 2:48 PM, Dave Wootton wrote:
> 
> > On second thought, I may not really need this. The 64 bit value is an
> > optional part of an attribute which I am treating as a string 
> > attribute
> > (since it's in the form ATTR=nnn,mmm). As long as I treat it as a 
> > string,
> > with the possible exception of some validation code, I think I 
> > don't need
> > the additional attribute types,
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > Dave Wootton/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS
> > Sent by: ptp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > 06/20/2007 04:33 PM
> > Please respond to
> > Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> > To
> > ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > [ptp-dev] Need new attribute type
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I found out that I have one case where I have an attribute that 
> > should be
> > defined as a 64 bit integer. Is it possible to define a
> > LongIntegerAttribute and LongIntegerAttributeDefinition, along with
> > supporting events, etc?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Dave
> > _______________________________________________
> > ptp-dev mailing list
> > ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ptp-dev mailing list
> > ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ptp-dev mailing list
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ptp-dev mailing list
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev

_______________________________________________
ptp-dev mailing list
ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev