axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "graham glass" <>
Subject RE: ? on WSDL spec
Date Wed, 31 Jul 2002 23:46:33 GMT
i think there will be a big developer backlash if overloading is
not supported via WSDL. as a consequence, most web service platform
vendors will try to figure out a way to support it in some way. so
i think it would be better to support it officially rather than try
to suppress it.

my 0.02


-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Neward []
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 2:48 PM
To: ''
Subject: RE: ? on WSDL spec

I'm not sure that statement

To many people, OO programming includes Polymorphism, and function
overloading is certainly a form of Polymorphism. :)

holds, to be honest. Polymorphism, IIRC, to use the term strictly, is the
ability to substitute multiple types (that is, a type is polymorphic if it
can be used in more than one environment/context). Within Java (and C++, and
C#, and a number of other related languages), this polymorphic behavior
comes through inheritance. We can certainly envision a world of inheritance
without functional overloading by name, no?

However, despite the intrinsic fun in getting into philosophical debates
about this stuff, this all gets WILDLY off-topic to the subject at
hand--WSDL 1.1 allows(?) for overloading, WSDL 1.2 disallows(?) it, even if
the various vendors offer it as a value-add feature(?). Correct?

Ted Neward
Architect, UCDavis Account & Financial Services

-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse D. Sightler []
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 08:58
Subject: RE: ? on WSDL spec

To many people, OO programming includes Polymorphism, and function
overloading is certainly a form of Polymorphism. :)

I totally agree that this move for "simplicity" by removing a common
programmming practice (which is especially popular in OO designs) is a
bad idea.

The spec is way to complicated to be removing simple, well-understood,
useful things like this. ;)

Jess Sightler
Exim Technologies
131 Falls Street
Greenville SC 29601
Phone: 864-679-4651

On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 10:58, J Hodrien wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 wrote:
> > Overloading is bad??!?  You ain't much of an OO fan, are you Tom?
> I don't see what OO programming and function overloading have in common.
> They're two different techniques.
> Having inheritence and classes that override methods with their own more
> specific forms is totally different from:
> void get(int);
> void get(char);
> There is no need for overloading at all (nor OO not that's appreciated
> enough these days).
> jh
> --
> "However efficiently artificial light annihilates the difference between
>  and day, it never wholly eliminates the primitive suspicion that night
>  are up to no good."
>                                                      -- Alfred Alvarez

View raw message