[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XMLRPC-92?page=all ]
Jochen Wiedmann closed XMLRPC-92:
---------------------------------
Resolution: Won't Fix
Won't fix; this behaviour is intentional, because using unsynchronized objects
(like ArrayList or HashMap) is preferrable over the slow synchronized versions
(like Vector or Hashtable).
As I already wrote in XMLRPC-89, it is possible to install an automatic
workaround for the parameters. This is not possible, though, for return values.
Currently you have two options:
- Use the ClientFactory, which is able to detect the requested return values.
- Change your code to expect List or Map as return value.
> The mismatch between request type and response type
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: XMLRPC-92
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XMLRPC-92
> Project: XML-RPC
> Type: Bug
> Versions: 3.0b1
> Environment: any
> Reporter: Zhou Jing
>
> The request is like this:
> Vector params = new Vector();
> Vector req = new Vector();
> req.add(new Hashtable);
> params.add(req);
> so, in the client side, the "req" contains a Hashtable, but after invoking
> the "execute" method, the server will get another request, namely the "req"
> contains a "HashMap" NOT a "Hashtable".
> on the other hand, about the response, if the response contains a
> Hashtable, that is:
> Vector response = new Vector();
> response .add(new Hashtable);
> then, the client will get a response, that contains a "HashMap" NOT a
> "Hashtable".
> BUT, I find that the package 2.1 doesn't have this problem.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
