Hi Andre and all, regarding copy semanctics of SAGA calls: (shallow vs. deep vs. references)
As the SAGA implementation should obviously show the same behaviour (either one for now), the spec needs to define that obviously.
Not quite. These issues are certainly beyond SAGA functionality. Rather, this should be addressed by the respective language bindings. For each language, the SAGA spec might "prescribe" to stick with the conventions of each language. IMHO, this would contribute to the "simple" attribute of SAGA: it would be simple as would do in any language what programmers are used to. In your case, the C++ binding could prescribe shallow copies (and maybe explicit "clone"), as this is what C++ does usually... My two cents, Thilo -- Thilo Kielmann http://www.cs.vu.nl/~kielmann/