cxf-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Freeman Fang (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Assigned: (CXF-184) parameter order should be take care of in runtime
Date Thu, 08 Feb 2007 03:36:05 GMT


Freeman Fang reassigned CXF-184:

    Assignee: Freeman Fang  (was: Jervis Liu)

> parameter order should be take care of in runtime
> -------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: CXF-184
>                 URL:
>             Project: CXF
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.0-RC
>            Reporter: Freeman Fang
>         Assigned To: Freeman Fang
>             Fix For: 2.0-RC
> Hi there,
> I'm seeing a problem with parameter order in cxf, and just thought I'd
> see if anyone else had any insights.
> Somewhat related to CXF-161, I was messing around with a test wsdl and
> added a parameterOrder attribute to an operation whose output message
> contained both a header part and a response part.  Unfortunately, the
> runtime doesn't quite work correctly when using parameterOrder.  (Often
> cxf won't find the correct method to call on the server side in this
> case).  The BareInInterceptor doesn't seem to account for the
> parameterOrder list when putting together the parameter list which is
> used to invoke on the server - it assumes header parts always come
> after all other parameters.
> I made a few changes in my tree to make sure the parameter list is 
> correctly ordered and that seems to make sure the right method gets
> invoked.
> The problem I'm seeing now though is related to the return type.  In my
> test wsdl, I left the return part unlisted but listed the header part in
> the parameterOrder.
> The issue seems to be that when WSDLServiceBuilder.buildMessage() runs
> for the out message of the operation, the order for the parts it gets
> is 1) header_part 2) return part (since header_part is in the paramOrder
> list but the response part isn't).
> Later, when the BareOutInterceptor.handleMessage() tries to write the
> output arguments, the arguments are in the order 1) return 2) out parameters
> (unfortunately not the same as the MessageParts order and so a problem).
> Not sure if my description makes sense, but I just wanted to see if
> I'm missing something here, or if anyone has any thoughts...  :) 
> Cheers,
> Peter
> -- Peter Jones

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message