Re: [Quickfix-developers] Using Quick Fix C++ API against Cameron FIX engine

[Jay B. <jay...@gm...>]

Yes Cameron has an API but it has a sad object model around it and you need
to write code to do all the heavy lifting, flattening to tags etc before
shooting it across the socket to the FIX Engine...

QuickFix API  seems to have well formed classes, nicer semantics of creating
and handling messages... so it would be nice where once can use QuickFix
with other FIX engines...

So I guess you can write code like:

void sendOrderCancelRequest()
    {
      FIX41::OrderCancelRequest message(
        FIX::OrigClOrdID("123"),
        FIX::ClOrdID("321"),
        FIX::Symbol("LNUX"),
        FIX::Side(FIX::Side_BUY));

      message.set(FIX::Text("Cancel My Order!"));

      *** FIX::Session::setEngine("Cameron"); *** // or set this in the
environment

      FIX::Session::sendToTarget(message, SenderCompID("TW"),
TargetCompID("TARGET"));
      // so this now send just the message and not the headers
    }


Thanks for the reply...


On 10/22/07, Caleb Epstein <cal...@gm...> wrote:
>
> On 10/22/07, Jay Bholenath <jay...@gm...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am a newbie to this FIX world... I like the C++ class design and the
> > API, but was wondering if I could use the API against a Cameron FIX Engine?
> > The firm I work for has standardized on Cameron FIX Engine...
> >
> > So the API formats messages and the appropriate tags but when a send is
> > called it shoots of the message to Cameron instead of managing the socket to
> > Taget itself...
> >
>
>
> You can certainly use QuickFIX to communicate with another FIX application
> be it Cameron or something else, but QuickFIX is a complete and
> self-contained API.  It has no means to pass messages up to some other API.
>
> If your firm has standardized on using Cameron, then shouldn't yo be
> developing using their APIs and not QuickFIX?
>
>
> --
> Caleb Epstein