Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-c-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 4411 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2006 15:57:07 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Jun 2006 15:57:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 90710 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2006 15:57:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-c-dev-archive@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 90691 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2006 15:57:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-c-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" Reply-To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 90680 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jun 2006 15:57:06 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 08:57:06 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [209.237.227.198] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (209.237.227.198) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 08:57:06 -0700 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33ED77141E0 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:55:30 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <20322285.1151510130194.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:55:30 +0000 (GMT+00:00) From: "Franz Fehringer (JIRA)" To: axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (AXISCPP-978) deserializing of arrays of complex types with optional elements broken In-Reply-To: <15014492.1151421089761.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXISCPP-978?page=comments#action_12418269 ] Franz Fehringer commented on AXISCPP-978: ----------------------------------------- I think i have found one problem. In SoapDeSerializer::getCmplxObject (SoapDeserializer.cpp) after having read the wanted item line 865 says m_pParser->next (); /* skip end node too */ With this statement the parsing advances from (CHARACTER_ELEMENT,END_ELEMENT) to (END_ELEMENT,END_ELEMENT). What is missing to my opinion and what i successfully put in is m_pNode = NULL; /* node identified and used */ after this line. Without this line, m_pNode stays on (END_ELEMENT,END_ELEMENT) and on the next call of SoapDeSerializer::getCmplxObject does not advance further in the lines 818, 819 saying if (!m_pNode) m_pNode = m_pParser->next (); > deserializing of arrays of complex types with optional elements broken > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: AXISCPP-978 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXISCPP-978 > Project: Axis-C++ > Type: Bug > Components: Client - Deserialization > Versions: current (nightly) > Environment: WIN2KSP4 MSVC6SP6 JDK 1.5.0_07 XercesC 2.7.0 > Reporter: Franz Fehringer > Attachments: pegs.wsdl, pegs.xsd, t_RoomRate2.cpp, t_SellRate.cpp, vaw.xml > > With AxisC++ (current SVN plus XercesC 2.7.0 on WIN2KSP4/JDK5/VC6SP6) i have a severe problem, namely that my response message is not parsed correctly. > With the fragment (whole xml response appended) > SINGLE > 70 > in the first line the AxisC XercesC wrapper advances (using next()) from START_ELEMENT to CHARACTER_ELEMENT after having read all attributes and therefore correctly detects "SINGLE". > But in the second line after having read all attributes, next() does not advance to CHARACTER_ELEMENT, but stays on START_ELEMENT, which means that "70" cannot be read (and the whole following xml block is disregarded too). > It seems, that in the second line the AxisC++ deserializing code thinks that there is something left, which has to be handled prior to advancing to the CHARACTER_ELEMENT. > We had some debug sessions and our first guess is, that there is something wrong with deserializing arrays/lists/sequences (which are nested in this case; maybe the problem?). > A second (to our opinion less probable) guess is, that the AxisC deserializer thinks, that there could be remaining attributes. > What can be observed is, that in the first (successful) case m_bPeeked is false, whereas in the second (error) case m_bPeeked is true. -- 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: axis-c-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: axis-c-dev-help@ws.apache.org