At 04:39 PM 5/16/99 -0700, Jim Frentress wrote:
> [Frentress, James] disagree. our entire system executes this way.
>system-wide, it's a screenful of code. our design adds extreme functionality
>because it can conditionally execute absolutely *any and all* requests
>supported by the underlying system (even if there's a failure in the midst)
>within a transaction, and allow the caller to peruse error objects by call.
>excellent for debugging. excellent for portability. excellent for
>maintenance and deployment. safer than a brittle session-wrapper that allows
>unqualified people to break the system in a very opaque way. did i say fast
>and featherweight?
I'll stick my head above the parapet and disagree here:) If I understand
you correctly you are talking about manipulating fine grained interfaces
from a client, this is good for you because it gives you a lot of flexibility.
However, in all large systems I have worked on fine-grained external
interfaces are a disaster for multiple team development, because the
possibilities for others shooting you in the foot are endless.
However bad it may be encapsulation-wise fatter interfaces mean that you
have designed the gun so the users of your interfaces can only shoot you in
the way you want. Interfaces have to be dumbed down if you want other
people to use them successfully and generally that is the case between
client and server and server and db etc in an N-tier system. So I'm all for
session wrapping.
I apologise if I have misunderstood what you were saying.
andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Andy Piper
Senior Consultant Architect, BEA Systems Ltd
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
