On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 16:04 +0530, Deepal Jayasinghe wrote: > > > >Hmmm. Good question- I also don't see why the ANON_* constants are > >externally visible. We put those to create underlying anonymous > >AxisOperation objects to make the simple API calls work right and hence > >should be private IMO. > > > >Deepal? > > > > > > > If some one want to create an operationclient using default service > client , then he need to have a way of knowing the name of the > operations (in the serviceClient) to create the operation client. So the > scansion I am describing is following; > > ServiceClient serviceClient = new ServiceClient(); > OperationClient opClient = > serviceClient.createClient(ServiceClient.ANON_OUT_IN_OP); > ... > opClient.execute(msgCtx);
That doesn't make any sense IMO .. the reason we use the anon ops is to make the simple case possible. If someone's getting at the operation client and doing stuff there better know the name of the operation. > We really need to have this feature , and we can not enforce user to > create service client using his AxisService. I am also create > serviceClient as above and use that to create operationClient whenever > necessary. I don't understand what you're saying- if the user is creating a service client with an AxisService they should know the names. If not, the existence of AxisService is hidden - they just say new ServiceClient() and just call the various call method shortcuts. Having the anon name exposed in inconsistent with that design. Sanjiva. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
