{{Quickfixn}} Code generation for admin messages in FIXT11.xml

[Eugen Dueck]

Grant

First of all thank for your answer. I'm sorry if you felt I was 
complaining. It seems you felt the need to defend Connamara or 
QuickFixN. That was not my intention. Neither was I demanding a feature. 
And certainly not for free. (We maintain an internal fork of QuickFixN, 
that has seen changes all over the place, and we aren't afraid to put 
time and effort into it to add or change things. Unfortunately, we can't 
merge that back into the official QuickFixN branch any more, because the 
biggest of those "all over the place" changes could only be implemented 
as an API breaking change)

So now the reasoning behind the disappearance is clear. It has been done 
quite consciously, and is not an oversight. That's good to know. Note 
though that I did not say they admin message classes have ever been in 
5.0. But for an upgrader from 4.x to 5.0 like myself, they stop getting 
generated, i.e. "disappear".

I was a bit surprised when you said "nobody needs them", when several 
people already asked for them on this list alone, and we both know how 
"custom" some custom FIX can get. So here's my use case: In some cases, 
a customer uses Reject(3) messages to "business level reject" a message, 
which we need to handle. I agree, they are probably doing "something 
weird or unorthodox". But like it or not, I have to cater to their 
specs. Which is why I used the "Reject" class in the past. So I'm not 
"creating and sending" an admin, I'm casting a message in FromAdmin to 
be able to handle it. As I mentioned in my last message, casting to a 
proper type is not necessary to get the job done, but having a properly 
typed Reject class is obviously nicer to program against.

Grant Birchmeier wrote:
> I disagree with the word "disappearance", as that implies that these 
> classes were ever generated for FIX5 in QF, which is not true.  Sorry 
> to nitpick on that.
>
> The simple answer is: We don't generate these admin message classes 
> because, per recommended usage of the library, nobody needs them.  We 
> don't need them for our projects, and we don't often hear from people 
> who need them, and certainly nobody's ever offered to pay us to put 
> them in.
>
> (QF is open source. People don't often pay us to improve it, so we 
> don't spend our free time writing things that we don't need.)
>
> Per recommended QF usage, when admin messages are needed, the engine 
> automatically creates and sends them.  At no point are users of QF 
> expected to create Logon or Heartbeat or Reject messages in user 
> code.  Why would anyone need to do that?  Usually when someone needs 
> that, they're doing something weird or unorthodox.  We simply don't 
> have the resources to give no-cost support for weird edge-cases like 
> that.  There are many other items with higher priority than that.
>
> -Grant
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Eugen Dueck <eugen at tworks.co.jp 
> <mailto:eugen at tworks.co.jp>> wrote:
>
>     Hi all
>
>     Over the months and years, several people have tried to make sense
>     of the disappearance of classes like Logon, Reject representing
>     the admin messages that are defined in FIXT11.xml, when using FIX 5.0.
>
>     To wit:
>     http://lists.quickfixn.com/pipermail/quickfixn-quickfixn.com/2018q3/000711.html
>     <http://lists.quickfixn.com/pipermail/quickfixn-quickfixn.com/2018q3/000711.html>
>     http://lists.quickfixn.com/pipermail/quickfixn-quickfixn.com/2017q2/000536.html
>     <http://lists.quickfixn.com/pipermail/quickfixn-quickfixn.com/2017q2/000536.html>
>
>     These questions have, to my knowledge, never been answered by
>     Connamara staff, or anyone else, on this list.
>
>     As a workaround, I'm currently using generic classes like Message,
>     Field, combined with the constants in MsgType and Tags, like
>
>     if (msgType == MsgType.REJECT)
>
>     So it is still possible to programmatically access and create
>     admin messages, albeit less conveniently as pre-5.0.
>
>     My question: Is this by design? Or will it perhaps be changed so
>     that code for admin messages will get generated again at some
>     point in the future?
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Quickfixn mailing list
>     Quickfixn at lists.quickfixn.com <mailto:Quickfixn at lists.quickfixn.com>
>     http://lists.quickfixn.com/listinfo.cgi/quickfixn-quickfixn.com
>     <http://lists.quickfixn.com/listinfo.cgi/quickfixn-quickfixn.com>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Grant Birchmeier
> *Connamara Systems, LLC*
> *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
> Exactly what you need. No more. No less.*
> *
> http://connamara.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixn mailing list
> Quickfixn at lists.quickfixn.com
> http://lists.quickfixn.com/listinfo.cgi/quickfixn-quickfixn.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.quickfixn.com/pipermail/quickfixn-quickfixn.com/attachments/20180828/a537360c/attachment.htm>