IMO interceptors are much simpilar than hard coded invokers. --jason
On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Bill Burke wrote: > What I'm saying is, why add this complication? Do we really need it? KISS. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hiram > Chirino > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is still the best thing since > sliced bread > > > How about implementing some kind of seperate interceptor framwork around > the client side and server side invocation layers?? > > David, if yoiu had a configurable way to plug in your tx interceptors at > the invocation layer you would be ok right? I think david just needs to > avoid duplicating the code that is in the trunk invoker all over the place. > > Bill, how doable is that? > > Regards, > Hiram > > Bill Burke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > IMHO, CORE client interceptors such as security and tx should be written > such that if the client doesn't support interceptors (C++) you don't > break > the server side or put additional configuration requirements on the > server > side. > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies! Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships. Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more. www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
