Re: SoapSerialiser

[John Hawkins]

Hi Roshan,

You seem to suggest that you have actual people who need these methods? If so, then they should be implemented (asap?). If not then I suggest we scrap them to avoid confusion and not have a middle ground . If people need the function back at a later date then we can use CVS to get back the old  code.


John Hawkins



Roshan Weerasuriya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/01/2005 09:31:43:

> hi,
>
> These are methods which are required by Hanlder writher who need access
> to the body. We did some work on this and they have more different
> requirements on accessing/setting the SOAP Body. Implementing all of
> those methods which are pointed here could be usefull for Handler
> writers.
>
> If you are going to remove these what abt having a JIRA issue on this so
> that we will not forget it.
>
> Of can we have API comments such as "This method is not supported
> currently, but will be implemented shortly or something like that" and
> let these methods be in the API.
>
> Any how these are different requirements which are needed by Handler
> writers.
>
> Roshan
>
> On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 14:14, John Hawkins wrote:
> > Anyone got an opinion on removal of these methods - or how come
> > they're in this state?
> >
> > John Hawkins
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Andrew Perry2/UK/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > 14/01/2005 16:10
> >          Please respond to
> >   "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> >                To
> > "Apache AXIS C
> > Developers List"
> > <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >                cc
> > "Apache AXIS C
> > Developers List"
> > <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >           Subject
> > Re:
> > SoapSerialiser
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The same seems to be true for IHandlerSoapDeSerializer
> >
> >    virtual xsd__hexBinary AXISCALL getBodyAsHexBinary()=0;
> >    virtual xsd__base64Binary AXISCALL getBodyAsBase64Binary()=0;
> >    virtual AxisChar* AXISCALL getBodyAsChar()=0;
> >
> > These are only partially implemented or not implemented and should be
> > removed from the public API until the implementation is complete.
> >
> > The getBodyAsChar() method also has a malloc() in it which shouldn't
> > be
> > used. For memory allocation news should be used. This method seems to
> > be
> > 'in progress' and not finished.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Andrew Perry
> > IBM Web Services Client for C/C++
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Mail Point 127
> > IBM UK Laboratories. Hursley Park, Winchester, Hants. SO21 2JN
> > Tel. Internal 249828  External + 44 (0)1962 819828
> > Fax. + 44(0)1962 818080
> >
> > John Hawkins/UK/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 14/01/2005 15:29:31:
> >
> > >
> > > +1 for removing.
> > >
> > > Nobody has requested this function and there is no impl.
> > >
> > >
> > > John Hawkins
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > Andrew Perry2/UK/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 14/01/2005 15:19
> > >
> > > Please respond to
> > > "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> > >
> > > To
> > >
> > > axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> > >
> > > cc
> > >
> > > Subject
> > >
> > > SoapSerialiser
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been writing handler tests to test the public APIs available to
> > > handlers and have come across several of the public APIs which have
> > empty
> > > implementations in the code and //TODO comments.
> > >
> > > Is there a plan to actually implement these methods?
> > >
> > > I feel that these methods should not be in the public API and should
> > be
> > > removed until there is an implementation behind them.
> > >
> > > Examples of these are :
> > >
> > > IHandlerSoapSerialiser->getBodyAsString
> > > IHandlerSoapSerialiser->setBodyAsHexBinary
> > > IHandlerSoapSerialiser->setBodyAsBase64Binary
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Andrew Perry
> > > IBM Web Services Client for C/C++
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Mail Point 127
> > > IBM UK Laboratories. Hursley Park, Winchester, Hants. SO21 2JN
> > > Tel. Internal 249828  External + 44 (0)1962 819828
> > > Fax. + 44(0)1962 818080
> > >
> >
> >
>