Sure, thats just making the "source and target interfaces use different databindings caused a databinding transformation" explicit on the message. So if you want it explicit like that that sounds ok to me as well.
Still seems like the pass-by-value code should be out of the Java implementation and part of the Tuscany core to me though so it works for all implementation types. ...ant On 9/5/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We could fix this issue by allowing some headers on the Message. The > DataBinding interceptor can then use one header to pass a flag down so > that > the Pass-By-Value invoker can skip the copy. > > Thanks, > Raymond > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ant elder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "tuscany-dev" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 3:27 AM > Subject: Avoiding unnecessary pass-by-value copies > > > > I'm looking at what we could do for TUSCANY-1559 which is about > > unnecessary > > pass-by-value copies causing failures when arguments aren't > serializable. > > The problem is on line 260 of JavaComponentContextProvider where it > tries > > to > > determine if the pass-by-value invoker is required, but it doesn't take > > into > > account whats at the other end of the invocation chain. > > > > How about changing this so its not the Java implementation types > > responsibility to handle pass-by-value and move it out into core, having > a > > separate RuntimeWireProcessor and Interceptor for pass-by-value support, > > and > > don't do copies if the source and target interfaces use different > > databindings? > > > > ...ant > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
