Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. General Programming
  3. ATL / WTL / STL
  4. BUG: ATL 7.0 fails if chunk size is 07ff (2047 bytes)

BUG: ATL 7.0 fails if chunk size is 07ff (2047 bytes)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved ATL / WTL / STL
c++csharpcssvisual-studiowcf
1 Posts 1 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Offline
    A Offline
    arun1405
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Hi Folks, I am using Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003 (Visual C++ 7.1) to access a webservice. Scenario is: I make a call to one of the methods of webservice. The call goes succesfully through the webservice. However, it fails while reading the response back from the webservice. This happens for a specific case if the chunk size is 07ff or 0800 bytes. Here, chunk size is the size of the SOAP response (it does not include HTTP header & footer size). Technically it is the value calculated as nChunkSize on line 1818 in atlhttp.inl. The code line is: cresult = get_chunked_size(chunk_buffer, chunk_buffer_end, &nChunkSize); The call fails because a value of LEX_ERROR is set by the "consume_chunk_footer" function of atlhttp.inl. It seems to me that in this particular case, the socket reads 1 byte less than the actual no. of bytes to be read, and so, it does not find the character '\n' which makes this function to return LEX_ERROR instead of LEX_OK. I have tested this taking various data. But it fails only for the above scenario. This seems to be a definite BUG. However, I am not sure if the patch already exists for it. If someone has any workarounds, do let me know. Regards, Arun Gupta.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes


    • Login

    • Don't have an account? Register

    • Login or register to search.
    • First post
      Last post
    0
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • World
    • Users
    • Groups