On 10/26/05, Warner Onstine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's what was unclear. We initially thought that the class specified was > the implementation, not the interface (the docs are not clear on this > subject). > > So, here is our situation, we would like to implement proxies, but we want > to do it in a non-invasive way. Should we create a custom proxy class that > is used instead?
First, you should be clear that proxies actually help you. IMO most of the time they make sense for collections to avoid materializing elements of the collection. But this is best handled via a collection proxy. I tend to use proxies only in collections and in references when they are back-references (the other end of a collection). And I never specify them for the class but rather in the reference/collection. For these references, I introduce interfaces and implementations, which both of them I map via OJB. This is slightly more complicated but works like a charm. Btw, you could also try to use CGLib-proxies which are some sort of auto-generated proxies where no interfaces are needed at all. You enable them in OJB.properties via the ProxyFactoryClass and the IndirectionHandlerClass settings, and then use 'dynamic' in your class-descriptor. I'm not sure whether they are already in 1.0.3 though, if not then you'd have to check out OJB from CVS or wait until the 1.0.4 RC that is due in the next weeks. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
