[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-786

[ALRubinger]

Keep coming around to this issue, and the collisions introduced by http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-1071 / EJB3 4.6.6 Bullet 1.

We can't allow a business interface to extend EJBObject/EJBLocalObject.

"bdecoste" wrote : I'm wondering what the trigger should be for us to support a 2.1 view (EJBObject)?  Maybe just the existence of a Home interface?
I'm thinking that's it.

"wolfc" wrote : How about we take out the explicit binding of EJBObject in the proxy factories. If one of the interfaces extends EJBObject it'll be picked up again.
We've now taken the explicit binding of EJBObject out of the Proxy factories, but again, since the business interfaces cannot extend EJBObject, we're now in the position where no Proxy object ever implements EJBObject; local/remote interfaces are impossible.

Guess we'll have to bind EJBObject/EJBLocalObject back into the Proxies, and only if a Home interface is defined.  This way, defining a Home interface completes a full EJB 2.1 view.  Side effect is that the Proxy can now be casted to EJBObject - is this allowable?

Only other option is to put remote/local interfaces into their own Proxy in JNDI.  We've talked about this before; seems excessive.

To this end. there's nothing in 4.7.1 that says that these classes cannot have overlap - ie. the class that implements the business interface may be the same class that implements the remote interface; in our case, the Proxy, which will do double-duty if Home is defined.

Thoughts?

S,
ALR

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4095880#4095880

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4095880