[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of POJO Server] - Re: JRMPProxyFactory equivalent for POJO Services

[ron.sigal@jboss.com]

"bstansberry at jboss.com" wrote : 
  | The JNDI binding could be done via an @JNDI annotation: 
  | 

That's pretty cool.  So, it looks like there are three votes in favor of removing the JNDI binding step from RemotingProxyFactory.  OK.

bstansberry at jboss.com" wrote : 
  | If the "factory" element supported a nested "bean" element it would be a bit cleaner.
  | 

Just to be sure I understand, you're talking about a microcontainer feature, right, not something I should do with RemotingProxyFactory?

I think the use of the factory element here is also pretty cool.  The one thing that strikes me is that the bean with the factory element is defined with a single interface class, even though the proxy will, in fact, implement two interfaces.  I certainly don't know the microcontainer internals, but superficially it seems like a bean with a factory element could live without a class attribute, since it could be derived from the factory method's return type.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4166540#4166540

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4166540