Argh, I was just waiting for someone to notice that one ;-)
"Jonathan K. Weedon" wrote:
> I must say I find it curious that when discussing the JNDI context,
> you say: "a helper class being used by the bean is considered a part
> of the bean", but when discussing the rules about file I/O, such as:
>
> An enterprise bean must not use the java.io package to attempt
> to access files and directories in the file system.
>
> you say that the helper class may or may not be part of the bean,
> depending on which class loader is used. Thus, you argue the helper
> class may be exempt from the above rule.
>
> IMO, a helper class is always part of the bean, both for JNDI, and for
> file I/0.
>
> Thoughts?
To keep it simple, sure, I agree.
But we're then back to the (seemingly eternal) question:
if a bean uses a JDBC connection, is that JDBC driver considered part of
the bean? If not, what is the differentiating factor that makes it *not*
part of the bean? Is it the classloader? Is it the protection domain? Is
it the interface it is implementing? Or what?
Thoughts? :-)
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================================
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".
