On 18/3/03 23:00, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I have the impression i didn't understand what Pier was implying
> because I'm sure he would not propose to force people to write that much
> java gluecode just for everyday FOM usage.
>
> Pier, can you elaborate more on what you wanted to say above? TIA
For those object on which we want to tightly control the behavior, for
example, you want to be able from a flow script to retrieve the "cocoon"
instance, but not to set it (readonly attribute Cocoon cocoon in IDL).
I'd settle with writing a bunch of "glue-code" for our (work) applications,
if that allows me to clearly define the boundaries of what flow-script
writers can have access to: I can write the glue and have much more
flexibility writing my backend in Java knowing that anyway, my team won't be
able to mess around with it...
Pier
