Awesome....My Vote is for #1 (code up real support for this kind of thing) that was reason for checking in the test case :)
-- dims --- Glen Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I4 is now merged over to HEAD, ant clean all-tests passed multiple times. > > The last problem was with the terra test - which I think is a bad test as it stands, >because it > relies on broken behavior to "succeed". We get XML back with a value of an ><xsd:list> type and > try to deserialize it - the test was failing with the change I made in >BeanDeserializer to be > more correct about throwing errors when a deserializer can't be found. It succeeds >with the old > code in there because we'll use a "blank" DeserializerImpl by default if we can't >find the right > deserializer, and that ends up with a null value for the field rather than an >exception thrown. > > We don't currently support <xsd:list> style enumerations. We should, I think, >either 1) code up > real support for this kind of thing, 2) throw errors when we encounter these >constructs in WSDL, > or 3) generate MessageElement/SOAPElement placeholders when we encounter them in >WSDL. Comments > about this in BeanDeserializer.onStartChild(). Once we resolve this, we should put >the > exception throwing code back in. > > Dims, this was your baby - opinions? > > --Glen ===== Davanum Srinivas - http://xml.apache.org/~dims/ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com
