-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Routtier-Wone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 05 February 2001 15:04
To: jBoss
Subject: Re: [jBoss-User] IsA behaviour when inheriting beans
>If you mean that it lacks mystery and will obviously work in all cases,
then
It doesn't work in all cases. Oh and using phrases like "obviously" is a
classic logical fallacy - but that's another newsgroup ;-)
>I fail to see the problem.
Yes.
>It doesn't seem any messier to me than this:
>> If however you are willing to code this all yourself and do it completely
>> (and don't forget to map it to the underlying DB correctly) then you can
>> have "proper" inheritance. (Oh and don't forget, you shouldn't really use
>> normal java casting for remote objects).
Agreed, but then my point in describing what I did was that it IS messy.
>But I have much to learn. What is the point that I have missed?
Yes. The point is precisely that, it's messy. Hard to maintain. Not
supported by the standard and doesn't extend well.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenworthy, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'jBoss' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 12:18 AM
Subject: RE: [jBoss-User] IsA behaviour when inheriting beans
> Uhm. That's the roll-your own kind of inheritance that you could even use
an
> 8-bit assembler to implement. Rather misses the point.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List Help?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List Help?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
