Ah, gotcha. So performance is the reason you'd do it.
Thanks!
On 9/4/07, Nodet Guillaume <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mainly if you really need performances over flexibility.
> If you inject a direct reference, there will be no marshalling and
> unmarshalling.
>
> On Aug 31, 2007, at 2:59 PM, Ryan Moquin wrote:
>
> > I'm referring to Nodet's response to my original question:
> >
> > "or using
> > spring
> > just inject an instance of the second service into the first one:"
> >
> > I was just wondering why one would want to do this, when they have
> > the other
> > option available.
> >
> > On 8/31/07, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/30/07, Ryan Moquin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> That's why I was surprised about the option to inject a bean
> >>> directly...
> >> it
> >>> almost sounds like going through the NMR would be worthless in that
> >>> respect. So it's just another option if you didn't care to take
> >> advantage
> >>> of the functionality the NMR provides.
> >>
> >> I"m not sure what you mean by 'the option to inject a bean directly'
> >> if you don't want to take advantage of the functionality the NMR
> >> provides? I'm not understanding this statement at all, please
> >> clarify.
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >> --
> >> perl -e 'print
> >> unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> >> );'
> >>
> >> Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
> >> Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/
> >> Apache Geronimo - http://geronimo.apache.org/
> >> Castor - http://castor.org/
> >>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
>
