Remy,
>Only the core objects have interfaces. Embedded is a helper object, so it's
>not an interface. Just like Catalina is not an interface.
>By the way, I don't see how having an interface makes it easier to work with
>Catalina. The only useful thing with interfaces is if you want to extend or
>reimplement something, because of Java's lack of multiple inheritance.
>
Not true. If you want to *secure* your impl from other code. You could
use three schemes:
1) seperate classloaders for the interfaces and impl
Catalina Impl Other Application*
| |
--------------------
|
System/Boot/Primordial & Catalina 'interfaces'
* that might want to invoke methods in Catalina via its interfaces.
2) Run the Object implementing the interfaces through a DynamicProxy
generator, such that the
Other Application cannot cast to the impl.
3) Combination of (1) and (2) to overcome introspection/serialization
tricks for hacking.
>Also, if you only want to use Catalina as a service inside a bigger
>framework, you should use CatalinaService, not Embedded (and no, there's no
>need for an interface for that either ;-)).
>
I will try with this. Two things though:
1) For exactly the same reason, it needs an interface. I *really*
*need* an interface.
2) CatalinaService exposes less methods than Embedded. Way less. I
guess the idea is that to add hosts and webapps, you should not being
doing it inVM via method calls but via a connector.
Regards,
- Paul H
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
