Gabe said: > Thread-safety is an issue for session scoped tools as well. The requirements > are somewhat different thought. Think about a web client loading a frame-set > page. It can easily generate multiple virtually concurrent requests that > are all within the same session.
bit of stretch, don't you think? i suppose it's remotely possible that this could cause a problem. but if such a situation did cause a problem, i would lean heavily toward faulting very poor design of the tool and site, rather than going to great lengths to prevent this. it's hard for me at least (even if no one else) to see this as a reasonable concern. IMO, the only scope where thread safety is a reasonable concern (barring any inappropriate use of static members, of course) is application scope. > > ...this is a very simple, > > specific, and real case that i must have repeated to you about ten times ... > > We are talking past each other here. I hear what you are saying but you > are not addressing my input. That's why repeating the same thing doesn't > resolve the issue. hmm. i disagree on your premise here. i do not simply repeat things for the sake of repeating them. if i write something, it is in direct reponse to what you have just written, that is why i always write my responses inline. so in my view, if what i say is being repeated, it is because i am responding to repeated input. but, i digress, if we are in such a rut, a portion of the blame is probably mine. i try to respond to all significant points made, but perhaps i have failed to do so. > Let me come back to this topic in a few days. I noted that there are some > open points here. well, then i look forward to your return to the topic. if you would humor me to repeat your input once more, i will attempt to address it as directly and thoroughly as i can. Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
