[ZOOM] Object Owenership (Was: Value Returned from Set Option (Was: Catching up))

Mike Taylor mike at tecc.co.uk
Fri Nov 16 11:54:37 CET 2001

> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 12:52:59 +0100
> From: Adam Dickmeiss <adam at indexdata.dk>
> Other than that I've made Z3950_record_dup (should it be called
> close?). And, the result set methods returns record refernces [...]
 "clone", right?

> [...] that are volatile and "owned" by the result set (and should be
> copied using dup/clone to release that ownership).

Why have you gone this route?  (I'm not saying it's wrong, just trying
to understand the reasoning and its implications for the C++ binding.)
Why don't you just make the record objects "self-owning" and

> Other than that I'm ready to make a new YAZ release again.

Have you renamed all the function etc. from Z3950_* to ZOOM_*?  I
would really like this change to happen ASAP because although its
conceptually trivial, it will hack people off -- so better to do it
early while there aren't too many users.  Thanks.

> I've written more about how ZOOM C maps to the protocol
> in the YAZ manual at http://www.indexdata.dk/yaz/doc/zoom.php
> Comments appreciated.

I've skim-read this, and it looks good.  More detailed comments to
follow, but I just wanted to say what a warm glow it gives me to see
this ZOOM work going on, and documented so well.  The reordering of
the whole Yaz document helps too.

 _/|_	 _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <mike at miketaylor.org.uk>   www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "My personal advice is don't overdo, or underdo, anything in
	 your writing.  Do it exactly right" -- Jane MacDonald.

More information about the ZOOM mailing list