Greetings,
Doug, can you explain how to generate the service interface and the
skeleton java files from a WSDL file in sun's jaxrpc development tools?
Or maybe I didn't understand the suggested procedures by you! (indeed,
its very annoying and dangerous replacing the builders/serializers files
in the default generated files by xrpcc).
Actually, I'm considering to try the AXIS (apache) to workaround this
problem, what do you think about using it? It has the tools to generate
stubs and skeletons from a WSDL!
Remember, I want to retain the original names of my web service
implementation interface for avoiding the confusion of the replaced
names (e.g. name1, name2, ... -> String_1, String2, ...).
By the way, I'm replying after a long time since the beginning of this
thread due some work in other projects that have me very busy. Sorry for
that.
thanks,
Pedro Salazar.
On Thu, 2002-12-12 at 18:25, Doug Kohlert wrote:
> Pedro, yes you should be able to modify all of the generated classes to
> match the WSDL and have it work. I am not aware of anyone doing this but
> it should be possible. Another approach is to modify the WSDL and regenerate
> the service endpoint interface and the stubbed out implementation class, and
> all of the serializer/builder classes. Then it should be possible to modify these
> generated classes to use your original service endpoint interface, implementation
> class and all of your value type classes. Of course we cannot support you in
> taking any of these approaches but in theory it is doable; however you may need
> to make quite a few changes in the code and if you miss anything finding the
> problem could be difficult.
>
> The easiest thing to do is to probably create the desired WSDL and generate the
> service endpoint interface and stubbed out implementation class, then modify the
> stubbed out implementation to act as a proxy or wrapper for your already existing
> implementation class. This would not require you to modify any generated code
> other than the stubbed out impl class which is expected.
>
> Pedro Salazar wrote:
> > Doug,