Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: AXISCPP-366
Type: Bug Bug
Status: Closed Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: Major Major
Assignee: Unassigned
Reporter: Manohar
Votes: 0
Watchers: 0
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
Axis-C++

getFirstTransportPropertyKey() returns NULL

Created: 07/Jan/05 11:20 PM   Updated: 11/Jan/05 01:01 AM
Return to search
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: 1.5 Alpha

Time Tracking:
Not Specified

Resolution Date: 11/Jan/05 01:01 AM


 Description  « Hide
Hi,

The getFirstTransportProperty() function in Stub class returns NULL. The test which is written to test the properties of transport has found this bug with latest builds. This function used to return the FirstTransportKey previously. But now it's not. Here is the code

const char* transprop1;
transprop1= ws.getFirstTrasportPropertyKey();
if(transprop1==NULL)
   printf("NULL \n");
else
   cout << "first transport property key is = "<< transprop1;

I've compared the Stub.hpp of the latest builds with that of the old builds and found the following change.I think these changes were put in by Samisa.

In old build,

const char* getFirstTrasportPropertyKey();

and in new build it's changed to

const char* getFirstTrasportPropertyKey() {return NULL;};

The same changes are included in other TransportPropertyKey related functions also.

Regards
Manohar

 All   Comments   Work Log   Change History   Subversion Commits      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
John Hawkins added a comment - 07/Jan/05 11:39 PM
Is there a repeatable test for this - you seem to suggest there is? Is it in the auto-fv suite?

Samisa Abeysinghe added a comment - 10/Jan/05 11:17 PM
getFirstTrasportProperty (n missing) is deprecated (and documented in header file) and should be changed to getFirstTransportProperty().

Hence I will change the test case, rather than the header.
Those wrongly spelled method names soon will be removed from the headers (hopefully before 1.5 is done)

I do not think it is required to keep the wrong spelled methods for the sake of backward compatibility.

Samisa Abeysinghe added a comment - 11/Jan/05 01:01 AM
Changed the test code to use the correct methods