I agree. The key point in using INOUT is, however, that the client is *obliged* to initialize each parameter, even if it is an de facto OUT parameter. Otherwise Axis will simply ignore it (which I think is strange). And that's the 'mental' difficulty. For instance, if one of the out params is an error code that is set by the server upon completion of the service, you have trouble explaining to the client programmers that it's their job to intialize it to some default value just to be able to get it back.
Lothar > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Brian Dillon (ext. 944) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet am: Dienstag, 25. März 2003 15:02 > An: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Betreff: RE: Out parameters > > Lothar, > > But this way is more of a 'workarround' rather > then defacto OUT parameters. > If you use INOUT parameters you would be better > off since the value of the > INOUT sent by the client (intialised to some > default) could be effectively > ignored by the server code and a return value > set. That is the INOUT could > be treated like an OUT parameter with the > provisor that you simple intialise > some default value on the client side. I have > used INOUT parameters like > this and it works ok. > > Brian. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lothar Nieswandt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 25 March 2003 13:08 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Out parameters > > > Sean and Brian, > > there *is* a way to get out params to work with Axis. You > need to bundle them in a complex return object like in the > following example: > > public interface MyService { > public MyOutParams foo(MyInParams inParams); > } > > The negative consequence is that the resulting SOAP calls > read like 'structs in structs'. In our case the > client calls > are 'hand-made' (not generated by Axis) and the client > programmers complain about the additional complexity which > is not justified by the SOAP spec only. > > There is space for improvements in this issue.. > > Lothar > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Brian Dillon (ext. 944)" <Brian.Dillon > () fineos > ! com> > Date: 2003-03-24 16:17:10 > > Sean, > > >From my testing, Out parameters do NOT work. You > will need > to use INOUT > parameters instead. > > Brian > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sean Leblanc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 24 March 2003 15:28 > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Out parameters > > > I had some questions about using "out" > parameters. First of > all, can it be > done? Second of all, do I have to build a special > deployment > descriptor to > do this, or can this still be done automatically > (by copying > .java file to > .jws)? > > TIA, > This e-mail, including attachments, is intended for the > person(s) or company > named and may contain confidential and/or legally > privileged > information. > Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use of this > information > may be unlawful > and is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, > please delete this > message and notify the sender. > > > ************************************************** > ************************ > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential, > may be privileged and is intended only for the use of the > recipient named above. If you are not the intended > recipient or a representative of the intended recipient, > you have received this e-mail in error and must not copy, > use or disclose the contents of this email to anybody > else. If you have received this e-mail in error, please > notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and > permanently delete the copy you received. This email has > been swept for computer viruses. However, you should > carry out your own virus checks. > > > Registered in Ireland, No. 205721. http://www.FINEOS.com > ************************************************** > ************************ >
