I cannot reproduce the problem with the latest code. My test scenario is the one described in http://markmail.org/message/zqmjfxad66mbssfy with the addition of multipleReferencesAllowed to the type David in DaveDetector.xml: <featureDescription> <name>variants</name> <description/> <rangeTypeName>uima.cas.StringArray</rangeTypeName> <multipleReferencesAllowed>true</multipleReferencesAllowed> </featureDescription>
Can you try this scenario using your build, and if it fails, try again using the binary build at p.a.o. ~schor/public_html/uima-release-candidates/2.3.0-RC8/uimacpp/ ? Thanks, Eddie On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Matthias Wendt <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I was using the 2.3.0 branch code, primarily to test the fix for the > "deserializeCasFromXmi" bug sent by Christoph Büscher later in December. By > the way, that test was positive :) > > > Regards, > Matthias > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:[email protected]] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 04:54 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as > > Matthias, > > Which 2.3.0 code did you use? The fix is not yet in the trunk, it is in > /incubator/uima/uimacpp/branches/uimacpp-2.3.0/src/cas/xmiwriter.cpp > > Did you use a binary build? > > Thanks, > Eddie > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wendt <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello Eddie, >> >> when trying the new 2.3.0 version of uimacpp yesterday, it turned out that >> the problem still occurs. Judging from the JIRA (issue: UIMA-1653), however, >> there is a fix for this. Could it be, that the test cases provided with the >> fix do not exactly reproduce the same behavior? >> >> Regards, >> Matthias >> >> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:[email protected]] >> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2009 22:51 >> An: [email protected] >> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as >> >> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Matthias Wendt >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I finally found out the difference between the two scenarios. My Annotator >>> has "multipleReferencesAllowed" set to true. >> >> Bingo! Problem reproduced here too. Is a bug in Xmi serialization >> replies. Normally all features of a type to be sent are checked to >> look for FS references. This check is done correctly for new types >> created in the service, but missed for types received by a C++ >> service. >> >> As you already guessed, a workaround with the current code is to add >> the new StringArrayFS to the index repository. Will be fixed in the >> upcoming release. >> >> Many thanks for your time isolating this. >> Eddie >> >
