Good enough for me. There's still the possibility of name clashes, but I'm not going to fret over it.
Russell Butek [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom Jordahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 02/04/2002 09:20:32 AM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Service interface Here is a suggestion: Check for "Service" at the end of the name, and don't append it if it's already there. This prevents the stupid name. Still avoids name clashes. -- Tom Jordahl -----Original Message----- From: Russell Butek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 10:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Service interface JAX-RPC 0.6 discussed generating a service interface and a service implementation. The interface was optional. In the interests of minimizing generated files, AXIS opted to NOT generate the interface. In JAX-RPC 0.7 the service interface is no longer optional. If the service is named X, the service interface is named X. That's the name we'd been using for the implementation. I would like to rename the implementation to XServiceImpl. I will not simply rename it XImpl because I've occasionally seen a binding and a service share the same name and we already generate an implementation template called <bindingName>Impl. Of course, most often the service name is something like XService, so we'd be generating the rather strangely named class XServiceServiceImpl. I'd be happy to hear better suggestions if folks have them. Russell Butek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
