On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:00:26 -0500, Stacy Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah I see what ur getting at â I believe that's only a potential issue if the > bean/object/vo itself is in a shared scope.
That's the situation we're used to today but that isn't necessarily true with the Blackstone example Damon Cooper gave on his blog for asynchronous execution - multi-threading within a single request and therefore the ability to pass the *same* object reference into multiple threads without it being in a shared scope (essentially multi-threading allows your local variable scope to become a 'shared' scope between those threads...). -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/ Team Fusebox -- http://www.fusebox.org/ Breeze Me! -- http://www.corfield.org/breezeme Got Gmail? -- I have 6 invites to give away! "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
