> I understand interceptors was one of the features "not
> included in this release". I won't hold my breath for EJB
> 2.1 :-)
>
> Validation in the value objects is something I had
> considered but for my particular use-case wouldn't give me
> any benefits (the validation is going to involve a remote
> call if in the value object, or a local call if on the
> server). I think for me Justin Couch's answer, of putting
> validation calls directly into the remote, and logic into
> bean class, would be better.
How can you put *anything* into the remote?
>
> It's quite a big switch in the way of working - for EJB
> 1.1, the Bean class itself has most of the work in it and
> the Remote is often nothing but an auto-generated view onto
> the bean. For CMP 2.0 it seems that the Remote becomes much
> more important and the Bean class becomes less so.
>
Whoa there. Interceptors have nothing to do with it. There is nothing which
requires that the CMP/CMR getter/setters be business methods, so you can
have validation, *exactly* the same as EJB 1.1, without interceptors, value
objects, or any other buzzwords. See my earlier post.
- Avi
--
This signature intentionally left blank.
===========================================================================
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".
