On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 09:47:18AM +0100, Rickard ?berg wrote: * (snip) * > Other than that I think that RE should and must be a checked exception, > for the reasons mentioned in the Sun Labs paper on the subject. If anybody is interested in reading the paper (its short, don't worry!) ... The Sun technical report TR-94-29, A Note on Distributed Computing, by Samuel C. Kendall, Jim Waldo, Ann Wollrath, and Geoff Wyant, describes the role of RemoteException, why it is a checked exception and not a runtime exception, and the basic difference between remote and local method invocations: http://www.sun.com/research/techrep/1994/abstract-29.html > /Rickard > > -- > Rickard Öberg > > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
- [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchronization waiting. Ole Husgaard
- Re: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchronization wa... Rickard �berg
- Re: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchronizatio... Dan OConnor
- Re: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchroniz... Rickard �berg
- RE: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchr... marc fleury
- RE: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchroniz... marc fleury
- RE: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchronization wa... Bordet, Simone
- Re: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchronizatio... Ole Husgaard
- Re: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchroniz... Rickard �berg
- RE: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchr... Derek Slager
- RE: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor s... marc fleury
- RE: [jBoss-Dev] InstanceInterceptor synchr... marc fleury
