cxf-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dan Diephouse" <...@envoisolutions.com>
Subject Re: Endpoints: JAX-WS vs. WCF
Date Wed, 11 Jul 2007 03:07:39 GMT
I think the interface/implementation value probably comes more in terms of
aop/testing/mockability/etc. For instance, I can add a @Transactional
attribute to my web service in Spring and get a tranasaction for each
operation. Hooray for magic-spring-annotation-proxy-goodness.

On 7/10/07, Ted Neward <ted@tedneward.com> wrote:
>
> That's not *exactly* correct, Dan; a WCF endpoint is created with a
> Contract, which can be specified using a variety of things, including a C#
> (or VB or C++/CLI or ...) interface with the appropriate custom attributes
> describing the contract, or it can also be done directly on a class using
> same said attributes. Most of the time when we demo WCF ("we" being
> "myself
> and the folks I teach with at Pluralsight"), we show the attributes on
> interfaces because that is the model that was most widely discussed and
> promoted for .NET Remoting and ASMX, not because it's the model that makes
> the most sense.
>
> I'm not suggesting that Microsoft *didn't* get it right here... I'm just
> wondering if it's really all that important to be able to slide a
> different
> implementation behind an interface, when the actual point of coupling is
> not
> the language interface, but the XML messages being sent back and forth.
>
> Anyway, just my $.02 worth. I, for one, am not all that upset at the idea
> of
> a single concrete class being tied to an endpoint, because I'm not
> convinced
> that the value of the interface-implementation idiom is that critical in a
> distributed system where the contract isn't given by the interface itself.
>
> Ted Neward
> Java, .NET, XML Services
> Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
> http://www.tedneward.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dan Connelly [mailto:daniel.s.connelly@comcast.net]
> > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 11:40 AM
> > To: cxf-user@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Endpoints: JAX-WS vs. WCF
> >
> > A JAX-WS Endpoint must be created using a service implementation.
> >
> > A (Microsoft) WCF Endpoint, on the other hand, is created with an SEI
> > (C# interface), not an implementation.    This allows multiple impls of
> > the same service interface to be reached through the WCF Endpoint.   The
> > Dispatcher, which is configured separately, has rules for invoking the
> > desired implementation.
> >
> > It seems to me that Microsoft got it right.    Does anyone want to
> > comment on that?
> >
> > Why is there no DispatchingInvoker class in CXF as a convenience when
> > the user needs a Dispatcher?    Is there a sample showing the coding for
> > a dispatching Invoker?
> >
> >        -- Dan Connelly
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/891 - Release Date: 7/8/2007
> > 6:32 PM
> >
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/893 - Release Date: 7/9/2007
> 5:22 PM
>
>
>


-- 
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions
http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message