You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to soap-user@ws.apache.org by Erik van Zijst <er...@marketxs.com> on 2001/03/06 10:56:53 UTC
Polymorphism in SOAP?
Hi,
Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for our
existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of arguments, but
in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a DeploymentDescriptor I can only
give the method names, not complete signatures.
What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for these
methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the SOAP layer?
Erik van Zijst
--
Heller's Law:
The first myth of management is that it exists.
Johnson's Corollary:
Nobody really knows what is going on anywhere within the
organization.
RE: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Oisín Hurley <oh...@iona.com>.
> The deployment stuff lets you only name the methods, but at runtime
> the polymorphic methods should be resolved correctly because actual
> dispatch is based on the signature too (of course).
Hmm, I'm a bit confused here, don't you mean overloading here rather
than polymorphism?
> WSDL is also weak in this area; if I remember right there was a
> sentence that said operation names have to be unique. Oops. If it
> did say that its gotta be fixed.
This makes me think you mean overloading - WSDL provides an interface
description without inheritance, so no polymorphism.
cheers
--oh
RE: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Oisín Hurley <oh...@iona.com>.
> The deployment stuff lets you only name the methods, but at runtime
> the polymorphic methods should be resolved correctly because actual
> dispatch is based on the signature too (of course).
Hmm, I'm a bit confused here, don't you mean overloading here rather
than polymorphism?
> WSDL is also weak in this area; if I remember right there was a
> sentence that said operation names have to be unique. Oops. If it
> did say that its gotta be fixed.
This makes me think you mean overloading - WSDL provides an interface
description without inheritance, so no polymorphism.
cheers
--oh
Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Erik van Zijst <er...@marketxs.com>.
OK Thanks.
Sanjiva, you've once more answered a couple of key questions that blocked our
SOAP development. Thanks for that. You (and the rest of the list of course)
have been a tremedous help so far!
Erik
On Tuesday 06 March 2001 16:35, you wrote:
> The deployment stuff lets you only name the methods, but at runtime
> the polymorphic methods should be resolved correctly because actual
> dispatch is based on the signature too (of course).
>
> WSDL is also weak in this area; if I remember right there was a
> sentence that said operation names have to be unique. Oops. If it
> did say that its gotta be fixed.
>
> Anyway, polymorphic methods should work fine with Apache SOAP
> right now. What you cannot do is decide that one of the overloaded
> will be published while the other is not.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Erik van Zijst" <er...@marketxs.com>
> To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 5:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
>
> > Update,
> >
> > I don't think SOAP itself prevents us from using polymorphism. In a WSDL
>
> file
>
> > I specify the arguments and return types of a method in the <operation
> > ..> tag. This would allow polymorphism.
> >
> > Is it an Apache-SOAP issue then? Or a limitation of standard soap
> > encoding?
> >
> > Erik
> >
> > On Tuesday 06 March 2001 10:56, you wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for
> > > our existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
> > >
> > > Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of
> > > arguments, but in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a
> > > DeploymentDescriptor I can only give the method names, not complete
> > > signatures.
> > >
> > > What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for
> > > these methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the
> > > SOAP layer?
> > >
> > > Erik van Zijst
> >
> > --
> > briefcase, n:
> > A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party.
--
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
-- Rich Kulawiec
Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Erik van Zijst <er...@marketxs.com>.
OK Thanks.
Sanjiva, you've once more answered a couple of key questions that blocked our
SOAP development. Thanks for that. You (and the rest of the list of course)
have been a tremedous help so far!
Erik
On Tuesday 06 March 2001 16:35, you wrote:
> The deployment stuff lets you only name the methods, but at runtime
> the polymorphic methods should be resolved correctly because actual
> dispatch is based on the signature too (of course).
>
> WSDL is also weak in this area; if I remember right there was a
> sentence that said operation names have to be unique. Oops. If it
> did say that its gotta be fixed.
>
> Anyway, polymorphic methods should work fine with Apache SOAP
> right now. What you cannot do is decide that one of the overloaded
> will be published while the other is not.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Erik van Zijst" <er...@marketxs.com>
> To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 5:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
>
> > Update,
> >
> > I don't think SOAP itself prevents us from using polymorphism. In a WSDL
>
> file
>
> > I specify the arguments and return types of a method in the <operation
> > ..> tag. This would allow polymorphism.
> >
> > Is it an Apache-SOAP issue then? Or a limitation of standard soap
> > encoding?
> >
> > Erik
> >
> > On Tuesday 06 March 2001 10:56, you wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for
> > > our existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
> > >
> > > Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of
> > > arguments, but in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a
> > > DeploymentDescriptor I can only give the method names, not complete
> > > signatures.
> > >
> > > What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for
> > > these methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the
> > > SOAP layer?
> > >
> > > Erik van Zijst
> >
> > --
> > briefcase, n:
> > A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party.
--
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
-- Rich Kulawiec
Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
The deployment stuff lets you only name the methods, but at runtime
the polymorphic methods should be resolved correctly because actual
dispatch is based on the signature too (of course).
WSDL is also weak in this area; if I remember right there was a
sentence that said operation names have to be unique. Oops. If it
did say that its gotta be fixed.
Anyway, polymorphic methods should work fine with Apache SOAP
right now. What you cannot do is decide that one of the overloaded
will be published while the other is not.
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik van Zijst" <er...@marketxs.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 5:07 AM
Subject: Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
> Update,
>
> I don't think SOAP itself prevents us from using polymorphism. In a WSDL
file
> I specify the arguments and return types of a method in the <operation ..>
> tag. This would allow polymorphism.
>
> Is it an Apache-SOAP issue then? Or a limitation of standard soap encoding?
>
> Erik
>
> On Tuesday 06 March 2001 10:56, you wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for our
> > existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
> >
> > Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of arguments,
> > but in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a DeploymentDescriptor I can
> > only give the method names, not complete signatures.
> >
> > What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for
> > these methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the SOAP
> > layer?
> >
> > Erik van Zijst
>
> --
> briefcase, n:
> A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party.
Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
The deployment stuff lets you only name the methods, but at runtime
the polymorphic methods should be resolved correctly because actual
dispatch is based on the signature too (of course).
WSDL is also weak in this area; if I remember right there was a
sentence that said operation names have to be unique. Oops. If it
did say that its gotta be fixed.
Anyway, polymorphic methods should work fine with Apache SOAP
right now. What you cannot do is decide that one of the overloaded
will be published while the other is not.
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik van Zijst" <er...@marketxs.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 5:07 AM
Subject: Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
> Update,
>
> I don't think SOAP itself prevents us from using polymorphism. In a WSDL
file
> I specify the arguments and return types of a method in the <operation ..>
> tag. This would allow polymorphism.
>
> Is it an Apache-SOAP issue then? Or a limitation of standard soap encoding?
>
> Erik
>
> On Tuesday 06 March 2001 10:56, you wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for our
> > existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
> >
> > Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of arguments,
> > but in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a DeploymentDescriptor I can
> > only give the method names, not complete signatures.
> >
> > What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for
> > these methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the SOAP
> > layer?
> >
> > Erik van Zijst
>
> --
> briefcase, n:
> A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party.
Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Erik van Zijst <er...@marketxs.com>.
Update,
I don't think SOAP itself prevents us from using polymorphism. In a WSDL file
I specify the arguments and return types of a method in the <operation ..>
tag. This would allow polymorphism.
Is it an Apache-SOAP issue then? Or a limitation of standard soap encoding?
Erik
On Tuesday 06 March 2001 10:56, you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for our
> existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
>
> Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of arguments,
> but in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a DeploymentDescriptor I can
> only give the method names, not complete signatures.
>
> What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for
> these methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the SOAP
> layer?
>
> Erik van Zijst
--
briefcase, n:
A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party.
Re: Polymorphism in SOAP?
Posted by Erik van Zijst <er...@marketxs.com>.
Update,
I don't think SOAP itself prevents us from using polymorphism. In a WSDL file
I specify the arguments and return types of a method in the <operation ..>
tag. This would allow polymorphism.
Is it an Apache-SOAP issue then? Or a limitation of standard soap encoding?
Erik
On Tuesday 06 March 2001 10:56, you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Straight to the point: as I'm building a complete SOAP interface for our
> existing Java API, I stumble upon polymorphism.
>
> Sometimes we have the same method name with a different set of arguments,
> but in the <isd:provider .. methods=""> tag a DeploymentDescriptor I can
> only give the method names, not complete signatures.
>
> What about this? Will I find myself writing different method names for
> these methods in the adaptor classes between my existing app and the SOAP
> layer?
>
> Erik van Zijst
--
briefcase, n:
A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party.