[jbossws-dev] [Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: JBMETA-44, ws annotation processing for references

[alessio.soldano@jboss.com]

This said, here is the current implementation for finding out the serviceImplClass and targetClassName used for the bind (from NativeServiceRefBinderJAXWS):

  |       String serviceImplClass = null;
  | 
  |       // #1 Use the explicit @WebServiceRef.value
  |       if (wsref != null && wsref.value() != Object.class)
  |          serviceImplClass = wsref.value().getName();
  | 
  |       // #2 Use the target ref type
  |       if (serviceImplClass == null && targetClass != null && Service.class.isAssignableFrom(targetClass))
  |          serviceImplClass = targetClass.getName();
  | 
  |       // #3 Use <service-interface>
  |       if (serviceImplClass == null && serviceRef.getServiceInterface() != null)
  |          serviceImplClass = serviceRef.getServiceInterface();
  | 
  |       // #4 Use javax.xml.ws.Service
  |       if (serviceImplClass == null)
  |          serviceImplClass = Service.class.getName();
  | 
  |       // #1 Use the explicit @WebServiceRef.type
  |       if (wsref != null && wsref.type() != Object.class)
  |          targetClassName = wsref.type().getName();
  | 
  |       // #2 Use the target ref type
  |       if (targetClassName == null && targetClass != null && Service.class.isAssignableFrom(targetClass) == false)
  |          targetClassName = targetClass.getName();
  | 

We have (#4) setting javax.xml.ws.Service as serviceImplClass when #1, #2 and #3 give no result. This imho hides an error, ie. not failing when @WebServiceRef.type is not set and the annotation has type (class) target. As a matter of fact, the javaee 5 doc says (https://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/javax/xml/ws/WebServiceRef.html):
anonymous wrote : 
  | type
  | 
  | public abstract Class type
  | 
  |     The Java type of the resource. For field annotations, the default is the type of the field. For method annotations, the default is the type of the JavaBeans property. For class annotations, there is no default and this must be specified.
  | 
Thomas, do you have an opinion about this? I think this implementation is simply a bit looser, nothing more.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4158002#4158002

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4158002