|
FAST Protocol
< Previous Next >
Re: Fast SCP
Jean-Marie Sulmont / RTS <>
1 Aug 2008 3:03AM ET<-- would be a is_a relationship.
i/o implement this one would need , as suggested by Hanno, to carry the length so that slicing can be operated properly
> No.
>
> Given T1 <-- T2 and M encoded with T2
>
> If I have both T1 & T2, I can chose either.
>
> If I don't need the extra data added per T2, I can chose to use T1.
>
> By definition of T1 <-- T2 then a message encoded with T2 *must* be
> decodable by T1.
>
> If you decode M with T1, then you will "slice" your message somewhat,
> but that might be something you want, or still better that nothing when
> you don't have T2.
>
> This would allow senders to "evolve" their templates, giving the choice
> to receiver to use or not this "evolution"
>
>
>
>
> > Hm, I'm still not sure how this should be used. If you have both T1
> > and T2 then you can use the right template to decode. If you don't
> > have T2 then you're in trouble as T1 doesn't contain the info need? Am
> > I missing something?
> >
> > /Rolf
> >
> > > Sure.
> > >
> > > Establish by spec a relationship (inheritance) between templates
> > > noted <--
> > >
> > > Say for example that T1 <-- T2 then if message M has been encoded in
> > > T2, then it can be decoded both with T2 *and* T1.
> > >
> > > As an analogy C++ inheritance, and pointer to base.
> > >
> > > does it make sense?
> > >
> > > > Not sure I understand what you are proposing. Could you please
> > > > elaborate?
> > > >
> > > > /Rolf
> > > >
> > > > > May be we could create a special relation between templates --
> > > > > like "Russian nesting dolls", or template inheritance.
> > > > >
> > > > > If template T3 <-- T2 <-- T1 then if message M3 has been T3-
> > > > > encoded, it then can be decoded by T2 and or T1.
> > > > >
> > > > > What you get when you decode M3 following T2 or T1 is not
> > > > > specified.
> > > > >
> > > > > That would solve Hanno's problem. That would also allow the
> > > > > notion of template specialization etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think???
Fast SCP Dimitry London / Morgan Stanley 30 Jul 2008 10:16PM ET Re: Fast SCP David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 31 Jul 2008 3:28AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 31 Jul 2008 6:17AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 31 Jul 2008 9:05AM ET Re: Fast SCP Hanno Klein / Deutsche Börse Systems 31 Jul 2008 10:06AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 31 Jul 2008 10:15AM ET Re: Fast SCP Greg Orsini / Cameron Systems 31 Jul 2008 11:44AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 1 Aug 2008 2:06AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 1 Aug 2008 2:39AM ET Re: Fast SCP
Jean-Marie Sulmont / RTS 1 Aug 2008 3:03AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 1 Aug 2008 3:13AM ET Re: Fast SCP Hanno Klein / Deutsche Börse Systems 1 Aug 2008 3:33AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 1 Aug 2008 3:57AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 1 Aug 2008 4:10AM ET Re: Fast SCP Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 1 Aug 2008 3:06AM ET Re: Fast SCP David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 1 Aug 2008 6:28AM ET Re: Fast SCP Jacob Northey / The LaSalle Technology Group 1 Aug 2008 8:21AM ET Re: Fast SCP David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 1 Aug 2008 9:33AM ET Re: Fast SCP Greg Orsini / Cameron Systems 1 Aug 2008 10:01AM ET Re: Fast SCP David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 1 Aug 2008 10:16AM ET Re: Fast SCP Greg Orsini / Orc Software w/CameronFIX 1 Aug 2008 10:32AM ET Re: Fast SCP David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 1 Aug 2008 10:58AM ET Re: Fast SCP Jean-Marie Sulmont / RTS 31 Jul 2008 10:19AM ET Re: Fast SCP Jean-Marie Sulmont / RTS 31 Jul 2008 10:41AM ET Re: Fast SCP David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 31 Jul 2008 11:10AM ET Re: Fast SCP Dimitry London / Morgan Stanley 7 Aug 2008 10:53PM ET
|
