Re: 'local' entity beans vs dependent objects

[Marcus Ahnve]

> That is, factor RemoteException out of your design
> entirely by declaring everything to throw it (since, IMHO, it probably
> should have been a RuntimeException anyhow).

I agree. You almost never can do anything except show an error message
anyway.

> So for example at design time where you aren't concerned about
> distribution and remote-vs.-local issues, you might come up with the
> need for a Person object.  Without even thinking about it, make sure
> that all of Person's methods throw RemoteException, even if Person
> itself will not implement Remote.

I see that it would be necessary if using the wrapper, but it is not
that nice though since it exposes the underlying implementation, i.e.
EJB. Oh well, cant have it all I guess.

/Marcus

Marcus Ahnve
Sun Java Center
Sweden

===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST".  For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".