quickfix-developers

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

[Alvin W. <AW...@FF...>]

IMHO, can QF have a configuration for this behavior? Exception(strict) vs 
Ignore(forgiving)...

Thanks






"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>
Sent by: qui...@li...
07/05/2005 10:16 AM

 
        To:     "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...>
        cc:     <qui...@li...>, 
<qui...@li...>
        bcc: 
        Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


My concern is how to handle the situation where the field already exists. 
If field 58 is set in the message, and I set it again with a field that 
has an empty tag, what does this mean?  Does it mean that I ignore the new 
field and retain the old value?  Or do I remove the old field from the 
message completely.  In which case setting a field with an empty tag is 
the same behavior as calling removeField.  Both of these behaviors feel a 
little surprising to me.  I'd be interested in hearing other opinions on 
this.
 
--oren
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: Oren Miller 
Cc: qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:40 PM
Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


Oren, I can understand where you are coming from. It makes total sense if 
QF throws NoTagValue exception in this case. However, I just feel it will add workload to the developers 
and the production may become disruptive. 

Thanks 
Alvin 





"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...> 
07/05/2005 10:00 AM 
        
        To:        <qui...@li...>, <qui...@li...>, "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...> 
        cc:         
        bcc:         
        Subject:        Re: empty tag



We could, although more likely I would throw a NoTagValue exception.  I 
don't much like the idea of having QF silently ignoring a field that the 
developer would be expecting to go out in the message (much like I don't 
like the current behavior).  I can imagine the head scratching that would 
go on if they added a field and then found it mysteriously absent in the 
logs. 
  
In either case if you have a field that might contain a blank value, I 
would suggest checking it before adding it to a message. 
  
--oren 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Cc: Oren Miller 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:10 PM 
Subject: empty tag 


HI 

If I set a tag as below: 
message.set(new Text(text)); 
and if the variable "text" is null. QF will include an empty tag 58. As a 
result, some FIX engine (such as QF itself) on the other end will reject 
the message.  Can QF skip including empty tag? 

Thanks 
Alvin ********************************************************************** 
This e-mail message is intended solely for the use of the addressee. The 
message may contain information that is privileged and confidential. 
Disclosure to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, distribute 
or copy this communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify 
us immediately by return e-mail (including the original message with your 
reply) and then delete and discard all copies of the message. We have 
taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses 
but nevertheless advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any 
attachment to this message. We accept no liability for any loss or damage 
caused by software viruses. 
********************************************************************** 

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

[Alvin W. <AW...@FF...>]

Oren, 

if we can discuss this issue in a more broader scope, can QF have a 
configuration to (dis)allow to handle "empty-tag" message received from 
counterparty?

Also, can the message.getFiled() method return null if a tag does not 
exist (or is empty)? rather than through a exception. 
I have found catching this kind of exception is troublesome and I have to 
wrap it in my own methods for each different data types.

Thanks

Alvin






Alvin Wang
07/05/2005 11:16 PM


        To:     "Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>
        cc:     qui...@li..., 
qui...@li...
        Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

IMHO, can QF have a configuration for this behavior? Exception(strict) vs 
Ignore(forgiving)...

Thanks






"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>
Sent by: qui...@li...
07/05/2005 10:16 AM

 
        To:     "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...>
        cc:     <qui...@li...>, 
<qui...@li...>
        bcc: 
        Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


My concern is how to handle the situation where the field already exists. 
If field 58 is set in the message, and I set it again with a field that 
has an empty tag, what does this mean?  Does it mean that I ignore the new 
field and retain the old value?  Or do I remove the old field from the 
message completely.  In which case setting a field with an empty tag is 
the same behavior as calling removeField.  Both of these behaviors feel a 
little surprising to me.  I'd be interested in hearing other opinions on 
this.
 
--oren
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: Oren Miller 
Cc: qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:40 PM
Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


Oren, I can understand where you are coming from. It makes total sense if 
QF throws NoTagValue exception in this case. However, I just feel it will add workload to the developers 
and the production may become disruptive. 

Thanks 
Alvin 





"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...> 
07/05/2005 10:00 AM 
        
        To:        <qui...@li...>, <qui...@li...>, "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...> 
        cc:         
        bcc:         
        Subject:        Re: empty tag



We could, although more likely I would throw a NoTagValue exception.  I 
don't much like the idea of having QF silently ignoring a field that the 
developer would be expecting to go out in the message (much like I don't 
like the current behavior).  I can imagine the head scratching that would 
go on if they added a field and then found it mysteriously absent in the 
logs. 
  
In either case if you have a field that might contain a blank value, I 
would suggest checking it before adding it to a message. 
  
--oren 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Cc: Oren Miller 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:10 PM 
Subject: empty tag 


HI 

If I set a tag as below: 
message.set(new Text(text)); 
and if the variable "text" is null. QF will include an empty tag 58. As a 
result, some FIX engine (such as QF itself) on the other end will reject 
the message.  Can QF skip including empty tag? 

Thanks 
Alvin ********************************************************************** 
This e-mail message is intended solely for the use of the addressee. The 
message may contain information that is privileged and confidential. 
Disclosure to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, distribute 
or copy this communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify 
us immediately by return e-mail (including the original message with your 
reply) and then delete and discard all copies of the message. We have 
taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses 
but nevertheless advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any 
attachment to this message. We accept no liability for any loss or damage 
caused by software viruses. 
********************************************************************** 

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

[Oren M. <or...@qu...>]

The configuration setting ValidateFieldsHaveValues already exists.

Returning null is not really an option in the C++ api.  I'm not really =
sure if always having to check for null before using a field really =
saves any trouble anyway.  The engine is designed to catch the exception =
and send an appropriate reject message if not present.  Maybe I'm not =
understanding your particular case, but I'm not really sure why you need =
to trap that exception in the general case.

--oren
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Alvin Wang=20
  To: Oren Miller ; qui...@li... ; =
qui...@li...=20
  Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag



  Oren,=20

  if we can discuss this issue in a more broader scope, can QF have a =
configuration to (dis)allow to handle "empty-tag" message received from =
counterparty?=20

  Also, can the message.getFiled() method return null if a tag does not =
exist (or is empty)? rather than through a exception.=20
  I have found catching this kind of exception is troublesome and I have =
to wrap it in my own methods for each different data types.=20

  Thanks=20

  Alvin=20




       Alvin Wang=20
        07/05/2005 11:16 PM=20

      =20
                To:        "Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>=20
                cc:        qui...@li..., =
qui...@li...=20
                Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty =
tagLink=20


  IMHO, can QF have a configuration for this behavior? Exception(strict) =
vs Ignore(forgiving)...=20

  Thanks=20




       "Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>=20
        Sent by: qui...@li...=20
        07/05/2005 10:16 AM=20

              =20
                To:        "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...>=20
                cc:        <qui...@li...>, =
<qui...@li...>=20
                bcc:        =20
                Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag=20



  My concern is how to handle the situation where the field already =
exists.  If field 58 is set in the message, and I set it again with a =
field that has an empty tag, what does this mean?  Does it mean that I =
ignore the new field and retain the old value?  Or do I remove the old =
field from the message completely.  In which case setting a field with =
an empty tag is the same behavior as calling removeField.  Both of these =
behaviors feel a little surprising to me.  I'd be interested in hearing =
other opinions on this.=20
   =20
  --oren=20
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Alvin Wang=20
  To: Oren Miller=20
  Cc: qui...@li... ; =
qui...@li...=20
  Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:40 PM=20
  Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag=20


  Oren, I can understand where you are coming from. It makes total sense =
if QF throws NoTagValue exception in this case. However, I just feel it =
will add workload to the developers and the production may become =
disruptive.=20

  Thanks=20
  Alvin=20



       "Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>=20
        07/05/2005 10:00 AM=20
              =20
               To:        <qui...@li...>, =
<qui...@li...>, "Alvin Wang" =
<AW...@FF...>=20
               cc:        =20
               bcc:        =20
               Subject:        Re: empty tag=20




  We could, although more likely I would throw a NoTagValue exception.  =
I don't much like the idea of having QF silently ignoring a field that =
the developer would be expecting to go out in the message (much like I =
don't like the current behavior).  I can imagine the head scratching =
that would go on if they added a field and then found it mysteriously =
absent in the logs.=20
  =20
  In either case if you have a field that might contain a blank value, I =
would suggest checking it before adding it to a message.=20
  =20
  --oren=20
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Alvin Wang=20
  To: qui...@li... ; =
qui...@li...=20
  Cc: Oren Miller=20
  Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:10 PM=20
  Subject: empty tag=20


  HI=20

  If I set a tag as below:=20
  message.set(new Text(text));=20
  and if the variable "text" is null. QF will include an empty tag 58. =
As a result, some FIX engine (such as QF itself) on the other end will =
reject the message.  Can QF skip including empty tag?=20

  Thanks=20
  Alvin =
********************************************************************** =
This e-mail message is intended solely for the use of the addressee. The =
message may contain information that is privileged and confidential. =
Disclosure to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If =
you are not the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, =
distribute or copy this communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, =
please notify us immediately by return e-mail (including the original =
message with your reply) and then delete and discard all copies of the =
message. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting =
software viruses but nevertheless advise you to carry out your own virus =
checks on any attachment to this message. We accept no liability for any =
loss or damage caused by software viruses. =
**********************************************************************=20

RE: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

[<Ani...@rb...>]

My two cents.
From business point of view, I believe an empty (standard) tag has no meani=
ng, so I believe, the current behavior of allowing an empty tag is merely a=
  technical fix to avoid the contentious issues you mention below  viz.
  i) Missing an expected tag
 ii) Removing an existing valid value tag
iii) Containing an incorrect (previous) value
=20
Possible Resolutions:
A) Configuration of allowing/disallowing in general carries the same surpri=
se elements
B) Configuring for a specific tag may be more desirable as it is a publishe=
d and managed resolution
C) Configuring for a specific tag for a New/Cancel/Replace) may be even mor=
e desirable
D) Configure to simply ignore empty values
E) Configure to ignore empty values with warning
=20
In my view default behavior as it exists now and with C and E  or B & E is =
desirable.
=20
Thanks,
=20
Anil

-----Original Message-----
From: qui...@li... [mailto:quickfix-deve=
lop...@li...]On Behalf Of Oren Miller
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:17 AM
To: Alvin Wang
Cc: qui...@li...; quickfix-developers-admin@li=
sts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


My concern is how to handle the situation where the field already exists.  =
If field 58 is set in the message, and I set it again with a field that has=
 an empty tag, what does this mean?  Does it mean that I ignore the new fie=
ld and retain the old value?  Or do I remove the old field from the message=
 completely.  In which case setting a field with an empty tag is the same b=
ehavior as calling removeField.  Both of these behaviors feel a little surp=
rising to me.  I'd be interested in hearing other opinions on this.
=20
--oren

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Alvin Wang <mailto:AW...@FF...> =20
To: Oren Miller <mailto:or...@qu...> =20
Cc: qui...@li... ; quickfix-developers-admin@l=
ists.sourceforge.net=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:40 PM
Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag



Oren, I can understand where you are coming from. It makes total sense if Q=
F throws NoTagValue exception in this case. However, I just feel it will ad=
d workload to the developers and the production may become disruptive.=20

Thanks=20
Alvin=20





	"Oren Miller" < or...@qu...>=20


07/05/2005 10:00 AM=20


       =20
        To:        < qui...@li...>, < quickfix=
-dev...@li...>, "Alvin Wang" < AW...@FF...>=20
        cc:        =20
        bcc:        =20
        Subject:        Re: empty tag=09



We could, although more likely I would throw a NoTagValue exception.  I don=
't much like the idea of having QF silently ignoring a field that the devel=
oper would be expecting to go out in the message (much like I don't like th=
e current behavior).  I can imagine the head scratching that would go on if=
 they added a field and then found it mysteriously absent in the logs.=20
 =20
In either case if you have a field that might contain a blank value, I woul=
d suggest checking it before adding it to a message.=20
 =20
--oren=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From:  <mailto:AW...@FF...> Alvin Wang=20
To:  <mailto:qui...@li...> quickfix-developers=
@lists.sourceforge.net ;  <mailto:qui...@li...=
ge.net> qui...@li...=20
Cc:  <mailto:or...@qu...> Oren Miller=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:10 PM=20
Subject: empty tag=20


HI=20

If I set a tag as below:=20
message.set(new Text(text));=20
and if the variable "text" is null. QF will include an empty tag 58. As a r=
esult, some FIX engine (such as QF itself) on the other end will reject the=
 message.  Can QF skip including empty tag?=20

Thanks=20
Alvin *********************************************************************=
* This e-mail message is intended solely for the use of the addressee. The =
message may contain information that is privileged and confidential. Disclo=
sure to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are =
not the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, distribute or copy t=
his communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify us immedi=
ately by return e-mail (including the original message with your reply) and=
 then delete and discard all copies of the message. We have taken precautio=
ns to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses but nevertheless a=
dvise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this mess=
age. We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by software virus=
es. **********************************************************************=
=20




<font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3">
<p>------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------</p>
<p> This E-Mail (including any attachments) may contain privileged or confi=
dential information.  It is intended only for the addressee(s) indicated ab=
ove. The sender does not waive any of its rights, privileges or other prote=
ctions respecting this information.  Any distribution, copying or other use=
 of this E-Mail or the information it contains, by other than an intended r=
ecipient, is not sanctioned and is prohibited. If you received this E-Mail =
in error, please delete it and advise the sender (by return E-Mail or other=
wise) immediately.</p>
<p> This E-Mail (including any attachments) has been scanned for viruses.  =
It is believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect an=
y computer system into which it is received and opened.  However, it is the=
 responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free.  The send=
er accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from=
 its use.</p>
<p> E-Mail received by or sent from RBC Capital Markets is subject to revie=
w by Supervisory personnel.  Such communications are retained and may be pr=
oduced to regulatory authorities or others with legal rights to the informa=
tion.</p>
<p>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D</p>
</font>

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

[Alvin W. <AW...@FF...>]

Oren, 

I use the same code base to deal with multiple counterpaties. We want to 
demoralize some fields and save them in our tables for future use. That 
means I only need to retrieve the values and save to DB. So sometimes I do 
not really care if it is Null or not for most of tags

Thanks
Alvin






"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...>
07/05/2005 11:45 AM

 
        To:     <qui...@li...>, 
<qui...@li...>, "Alvin Wang" 
<AW...@FF...>
        cc: 
        bcc: 
        Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


The configuration setting ValidateFieldsHaveValues already exists.
 
Returning null is not really an option in the C++ api.  I'm not really 
sure if always having to check for null before using a field really saves 
any trouble anyway.  The engine is designed to catch the exception and 
send an appropriate reject message if not present.  Maybe I'm not 
understanding your particular case, but I'm not really sure why you need 
to trap that exception in the general case.
 
--oren
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: Oren Miller ; qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag


Oren, 

if we can discuss this issue in a more broader scope, can QF have a 
configuration to (dis)allow to handle "empty-tag" message received from 
counterparty? 

Also, can the message.getFiled() method return null if a tag does not 
exist (or is empty)? rather than through a exception. 
I have found catching this kind of exception is troublesome and I have to 
wrap it in my own methods for each different data types. 

Thanks 

Alvin 





Alvin Wang 
07/05/2005 11:16 PM 

        To:        "Oren Miller" <or...@qu...> 
        cc:        qui...@li..., qui...@li... 
        Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tagLink


IMHO, can QF have a configuration for this behavior? Exception(strict) vs 
Ignore(forgiving)... 

Thanks 





"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...> 
Sent by: qui...@li... 
07/05/2005 10:16 AM 
        
        To:        "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...> 
        cc:        <qui...@li...>, 
<qui...@li...> 
        bcc:         
        Subject:        Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag



My concern is how to handle the situation where the field already exists. 
If field 58 is set in the message, and I set it again with a field that 
has an empty tag, what does this mean?  Does it mean that I ignore the new 
field and retain the old value?  Or do I remove the old field from the 
message completely.  In which case setting a field with an empty tag is 
the same behavior as calling removeField.  Both of these behaviors feel a 
little surprising to me.  I'd be interested in hearing other opinions on 
this. 
  
--oren 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: Oren Miller 
Cc: qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:40 PM 
Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag 


Oren, I can understand where you are coming from. It makes total sense if 
QF throws NoTagValue exception in this case. However, I just feel it will add workload to the developers 
and the production may become disruptive. 

Thanks 
Alvin 




"Oren Miller" <or...@qu...> 
07/05/2005 10:00 AM 
        
       To:        <qui...@li...>, <qui...@li...>, "Alvin Wang" <AW...@FF...> 
       cc:         
       bcc:         
       Subject:        Re: empty tag




We could, although more likely I would throw a NoTagValue exception.  I 
don't much like the idea of having QF silently ignoring a field that the 
developer would be expecting to go out in the message (much like I don't 
like the current behavior).  I can imagine the head scratching that would 
go on if they added a field and then found it mysteriously absent in the 
logs. 
 
In either case if you have a field that might contain a blank value, I 
would suggest checking it before adding it to a message. 
 
--oren 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alvin Wang 
To: qui...@li... ; qui...@li... 
Cc: Oren Miller 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:10 PM 
Subject: empty tag 


HI 

If I set a tag as below: 
message.set(new Text(text)); 
and if the variable "text" is null. QF will include an empty tag 58. As a 
result, some FIX engine (such as QF itself) on the other end will reject 
the message.  Can QF skip including empty tag? 

Thanks 
Alvin ********************************************************************** 
This e-mail message is intended solely for the use of the addressee. The 
message may contain information that is privileged and confidential. 
Disclosure to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, distribute 
or copy this communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify 
us immediately by return e-mail (including the original message with your 
reply) and then delete and discard all copies of the message. We have 
taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses 
but nevertheless advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any 
attachment to this message. We accept no liability for any loss or damage 
caused by software viruses. 
********************************************************************** 

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Re: empty tag

[Caleb E. <cal...@gm...>]

On 7/6/05, Alvin Wang <AW...@ff...> wrote:

> I use the same code base to deal with multiple counterpaties. We want to
> demoralize some fields and save them in our tables for future use. That
> means I only need to retrieve the values and save to DB. So sometimes I d=
o
> not really care if it is Null or not for most of tags=20

Then use the FieldMap::isSetField method to check if the field is
populated before trying to fetch it.

--=20
Caleb Epstein
caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com