magosoft / xmlrpcnet

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/xmlrpcnet
0 stars 0 forks source link

XmlRpcStruct doesn't return data as method's Response #54

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
What steps will reproduce the problem?

1. I am using xml-rpc service to insert/update users. The method I use is 
accept array of struct as input users and returns a struct of the same 
users being inserted as a 'Response'. This is how I am calling the method:

IServiceSystem iss = XmlRpcProxyGen.Create<IServiceSystem>();

XmlRpcStruct upd = new XmlRpcStruct();

upd = iss.update(hash, domain, timestamp, nonce, u_update);

where first four parameters are constant and the last one 'u_update' is a 
method specific parameter which is an 'array of struct'.

when I call this method to hold the Response in XmlRpcStruct using the 
following DictionaryEntry: 

foreach (DictionaryEntry d in upd)
    {   
    Console.WriteLine(d.Key.ToString() + " : " + d.Value.ToString());
    }

Then it doesn't return struct values as method response object.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

The exepected outupt should be in a struct data with key/value pair but it 
only returns:

successes: System.Object[]
failures: System.Object[]

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?

I am using xml-rpc version 2.4.0 with CookComputing.XmlRpcV2.dll as a 
reference in C# console application project.

Please provide any additional information below.

It seems that XmlRpcStruct can't expose the response object in C#. Please 
advise me how can I get the response back in key/value pair using 
XmlRpcStruct?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by gr8...@gmail.com on 8 Jul 2009 at 11:13

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
User misunderstanding

Original comment by ChasC...@gmail.com on 28 Jul 2009 at 8:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by ChasC...@gmail.com on 22 May 2010 at 4:01

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
this issue had been resolved in July 2009. Thanks to Charles Cook and others.

Original comment by gr8...@gmail.com on 25 May 2010 at 10:24