Reported by michelpons, 4 years ago.

When I propose text about "what is COBIA", I re-used text that we had put together previously. When re-reading it, I am not sure that " and to support a variety of development tools" is the proper language. Looking at what is meant by "development tools", I find "A computer program that is used by the software developers for creating, editing, maintaining, supporting and debugging other applications, frameworks and programs – is termed as a Software Development Tool or a Software Programming Tool. Development tools can be of many forms like linkers, compilers, code editors, GUI designer, assemblers, debugger, performance analysis tools etc.". Are we meaning really all these or are we stating that COBIA is meant to support a number of programming languages? It may not even be "support" but "bind automatically to several programming languages". What is the meaning given to "development tools" in our text?

Reported by michelpons, 4 years ago.

In the section on interfaces, wrappers and adapters of the main page of the COBIA Reference, at the very end, there is the following sentence "To generate all the functions and derive from the proper base class to implement an interface, the COBIA code generators can be used. E.g. use COBIA_CodeGen with the -c, -i and -A options." The code generator is not part of the reference. Is there a way to point to some place on the machine where the code generator stands? The COBIA SDK installer does not give the option to install only COBIA Reference so everything present in the COBIA SDK installer ends up to be installed, among those the COBIA code generator. So is there a link somehow that can be inserted to point to the code generator executable? Otherwise this reference does not make much sense as it is.

Reported by michelpons, 4 years ago.

In the section on interfaces, wrappers and adapters of the main page of COBIA Reference, there is the sentence "For example, wrappers take care of hiding the object pointer, of checking return values and converting these into C++ exception, and for converting return values from an output argument to an actual return value.". Why is it "for converting" and not "of converting"? Is it also common to say "converting these into C++ exception" because this conversion happens only if the check of the return values says that something is amiss? Why not "of checking return values (and if necessary raise en exception), and of converting return values from an output argument to an actual return value"?