On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Mike Edwards <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike Edwards wrote: >> >> The next step is to fix up the interface mapping between the (client) >> synchronous version of the service interface and the (server) async version, >> so that these visibly different (Java) interfaces are treated as being >> compatible. >> >> >> Yours, Mike. >> > Folks, > > Today, we made changes to: > > JavaInterfaceImpl > JavaInterfaceFactoryImpl > > which enable a Java interface marked as "asyncInvocation" to be recognised > as an SCA async server interface and for methods following the async server > pattern > void xxxAsync( param1, param2..., DispatchResponse<ResponseMessage>) > to be recognized as async invocations. > > Such interfaces are stored in 2 forms > > a) the async form as introspected from the interface class > b) the equivalent mapped synchronous interface > > a) is used for the invokers > b) is used for other uses in particular for comparisons with other > interfaces in the structural hierarchy and in performing wiring > > This enables testcase JCA_7003 to run as far as the point where the invoker > on the service side is created. > > Updating the invoker is the next task. > > > Yours, Mike. >
I had originally started that on JAXWSAsyncInterfaceProcessor following the same pattern that you are describing and I think it would be a better location for these code to reside. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
