Re: [Quickfixj-users] repeating group problem

[<st...@te...>]

> Yeah, I would recommend adopting the same practice as the C++ engine
> of placing the delimiter first no matter what.  For all practical
> purposes, this is all you really need.  The spec does specify that
> all fields must be in a certain order, but most implementations,
> QuickFIX included, do not care as long as the delimiter is in the
> right place.  Despite this, your recommendation of using the
> generated group is the best way to go.

I've made the change in the QFJ trunk.

> Dynamically creating groups based on the DataDictionary is an
> interesting idea.  What do you think of flipping it around a little
> and turning the DataDictionary into a kind of factory.  I'm thinking:
>
> Group group = dataDictionary.createGroup( "X", NoPartyIDs.FIELD )
>
> Then you can even add createMessage( "X" ), and createField methods.
> Could be useful for some use cases that require more dynamic
> capabilities.

Interesting idea. It would be nice to have a dynamic factory. What about
using (and extending) the quickfix.MessageFactory with an implementation
that uses a data dictionary for generating messages and parts of messages
like groups, components and fields?

The only minor concern I have about adding it to the DataDictionary is
that this seems to add a new responsibility to the dictionary. I'd even
like to see validation extracted to a validator class rather than tightly
coupled to the metadata management provided by the DataDictionary.

Regards,

Steve