The ANT build does similar things but not in the right order :-)
It used to check if there were diffs in a particular directory before it built. If there were it used to apply those diffs and then build.
The test framework takes WSDL's runs WSDL2Ws against them to create the stubs and then compiles them against an already created client.
So, you could take the test bit to run WSDL2Ws against your WSDL's, run the ANT bit to apply diffs to the created stubs and then compile them using the test bit again ?
This way you would get platform independence too !
| "Kenneth F. Krutsch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/02/2005 15:55
|
|
Fantastic... FWIW, we are building our application 'Contract First' (i.e., from the WSDL outwards) and I've noticed that we are regenerating the code very frequently (mostly due to our inexperience with WSDL). Towards this end, we are developing a script to automate the code-generation process. That is, after re-generating the C++ source from the WSDL, patch back-in your manual edits, then build the correct configure script and Makefile for Linux.
Is this something that would be useful to contribute to the project? Also, has anyone else built anything like this that they could share?
Thanks, Ken
From: John Hawkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 9:40 AM
To: Apache AXIS C User List
Subject: RE: Gnu Make files
Great - I'm pleased that you are using it.
When I say destabilising I'm just saying that we are trying to avoid having to maintain pieces of code that are not being used - no big issues :-)
| "Kenneth F. Krutsch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/02/2005 15:20
|
|
Hello:
Yes, we are using it and would really appreciate it if this functionality could remain. This seems like a relatively simple function, so I am surprised to hear that it is destabilizing the code-base.
Thanks, Ken
From: John Hawkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 3:55 AM
To: axis-c-user@ws.apache.org
Subject: Fw: Gnu Make files
Hello,
does anyone out there use the -m function (creation of makefiles) on WSDL2Ws ? If not then we are thnking of removing it to increase stability.
cheers,
John.
----- Forwarded by John Hawkins/UK/IBM on 09/02/2005 09:49 -----
| Samisa Abeysinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
09/02/2005 06:19
|
|
Given that we have problems with make file system even with build on
L/Unix like platforms, I feel that it is not worth having it here.
Could document how to compile and link clients/servers using basic g++
commands to help users.
Thanks,
Samisa...
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 16:18:30 +0000, Andrew Perry2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is a test which checks -m option. but it only checks if the makefile
> is generated or not and not the validity of the makefile.
> These WSDL2WS options tests will be added soon.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Perry
> IBM Web Services Client for C/C++
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mail Point 127
> IBM UK Laboratories. Hursley Park, Winchester, Hants. SO21 2JN
> Tel. Internal 249828 External + 44 (0)1962 819828
> Fax. + 44(0)1962 818080
>
> John
> Hawkins/UK/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> MGB To
> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> 08/02/2005 14:57 <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> cc
>
> Please respond to Subject
> "Apache AXIS C Re: Gnu Make files
> Developers List"
>
>
> It is an option currently on WSDL2Ws ->
> "-m<none|gnu> generate make files (none|gnu) - default is
> none\n");
>
> Nadir Amra
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To
> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> 08/02/2005 14:44 <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> cc
>
> Please respond to Subject
> "Apache AXIS C Re: Gnu Make files
> Developers List"
>
>
> I prefer not to generate makefiles....but if people want this then it
> should be on option on the command that you would need to set (i.e. it
> should not be automatically generated).
>
> John Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02/08/2005 08:43:00 AM:
>
> >
> > Hi Folk,
> >
> > I remember a long time ago a small debate about having WSD2Ws
> > generate Gnu make files? I think this is wierd and I remember some
> > people objecting previously. However, Do we test this today? If not
> > then I suggest remove this function on the basis that we're just
> > making more rope to hang ourselves with?
> >
> > I've certainly not seen anyone on the mailng list using this?
> >
> > thoughts?
> >
> > cheers
> > John.
>
>
