XFire

Aegis Polymophism does not support interfaces

Details

  • Type: Improvement Improvement
  • Status: Open Open
  • Priority: Major Major
  • Resolution: Unresolved
  • Affects Version/s: 1.2-RC
  • Fix Version/s: None
  • Component/s: Aegis Module
  • Labels:
    None
  • Number of attachments :
    0

Description

Using a class hierarchy such as:

abstract class Base{}
abstract class Class1 extends Base{}

generates a correct schema (WSDL) hierarchy. If Base (or Base & Class1) are interfaces, the polymorphic hierarchy is dropped. It looks like the xsi:complexContent element is only being added for superclasses. If you wish to expose all services over interfaces, then polymorphism is not possible.

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
Dan Diephouse added a comment -

I started looking into this, but I don't see how xml schema could support multiple inheritance (which is what interfaces require). We could switch to substitution groups, but I don't see that happening in the near future. I'm unscheduling this for 1.2 for now.

Show
Dan Diephouse added a comment - I started looking into this, but I don't see how xml schema could support multiple inheritance (which is what interfaces require). We could switch to substitution groups, but I don't see that happening in the near future. I'm unscheduling this for 1.2 for now.
Hide
Permalink
Jonathan Gilbert added a comment -

Would it be possible to only support recognising the 1st interface or something? I believe that this would be the usage pattern (single inheritance) for 90% of applications (this is certainly all I would require). I think what is really needed is a way to get single inheritance (without exposing the implementation class) - currently this is impossible through abstract classes due to bug#558.

Show
Jonathan Gilbert added a comment - Would it be possible to only support recognising the 1st interface or something? I believe that this would be the usage pattern (single inheritance) for 90% of applications (this is certainly all I would require). I think what is really needed is a way to get single inheritance (without exposing the implementation class) - currently this is impossible through abstract classes due to bug#558.
Hide
Permalink
Dan Diephouse added a comment -

I'll look into XFIRE-558, I didn't see that bug before. While I'm investigating I'll see if single inheritance is possible to do with interfaces. I'll keep you posted.

Show
Dan Diephouse added a comment - I'll look into XFIRE-558 , I didn't see that bug before. While I'm investigating I'll see if single inheritance is possible to do with interfaces. I'll keep you posted.

People

  • Assignee:
    Dan Diephouse
    Reporter:
    Jonathan Gilbert
Vote (0)
Watch (3)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated: