Re[4]: [PEAR-DEV] SOAP Objects..

At 06:45 PM 5/23/2001 +0200, Nicolas Hoizey wrote:

Good news. I have been able to communicate with Dietrich. He likes the idea of me PEARifying his code and enhancing it. Great ! Did he give you his server stuff ? It is not yet available on his web site...

No he did not. He also said that he is working on some WSDL stuff. he suggested that we stick to a solid client and get that built first and I agree with him. I was able to study his code for a little while today and in some respects I like my stuff better and in other respects I like his stuff better. At this point I am not quite sure if we should merge his code with mine or vice versa. I of course am leaning towards incorporating his code into mine because it's already PEAR (thanks to Stig) and because I am more familiar with it. It also follows my own coding conventions which I feel more at home with. All of this is purely subjective on my part and of course I would have a bias towards the code that I have written. Maybe you can be a honest broker. Take a look at both implementations and let me know which you would rather work on. I will abide with whatever you choose because you are an uninterested third party. I really want to make the soap response to be a separate object. Right now it's bundled in with another object. I am debating on weather the transports should be other objects too. It may be an overkill and it may be more straightforward to have the client have different methods like client->sendHTTP client->SendSMTP etc.. This approach works pretty well as long as the transport is simple enough to fit into a function or two but maybe more cumbersome if the transport is really tricky. :wq Tim Uckun

Due Diligence Inc.  http://www.diligence.com/    Americas Background Investigation Expert.
If your company isn't doing background checks, maybe you haven't considered the risks of a bad hire.