Michael McGrady wrote: > Thanks, John. I agree with everything you say. However . . . but . . . > why not do what it takes to split them? Why not put all the classes > necessry to do JavaSpaces in JavaSpaces? Now would be the time to do > it, if ever? If one of JavaSpaces or JINI has to "wear the pants", > shouldn't it be JavaSpaces and not JINI, i.e., shouldn't JINI depend on > JavaSpaces and not the reverse?
And how you would look up your JavaSpace "without Jini"? Jini by itself doesn't really do anything useful, the services are key - but that means they have to depend on the foundation. You don't have to use the foundation if you don't have to, though the Entry interface is a good example for why things are (and have to be) the way they are. -h
