No, I'm not taking anything personally, no problem man. But it tickles me. A lot of people on the list have the access to the books and the specs, yet they choose not to read them before they post their responses. For instance, the part about static methods I copied from the spec, well I found that in 30 seconds using Acrobat Reader(free), the latest spec PDF(free) and the find function. The reason I joined the list was to learn, and the only way I did so was by reading and confirming my answers with the spec and thru the internet. Getting answers that are woven out of your mind is GOOD, but you should always check if somebody has asked the question before, and if there is an answer. Don't mind giving somebody a partially wrong response; a partially wrong response is better than no response. But if you don't check throroughly first, you risk incorporating as fact something wrong. The person "paying the cost" is finally yourself. I apologize for being rude, I have no excuse for that-- maybe too much coffee, but that's hardly your fault.
I hope you think carefully about what I have told you. I also hope that my harsh, acid comebacks haven't diminished your desire to participate. I'm sure debate helps everybody comprehend EJBs better. Remember, as a rule of thumb, you should try to verify your info before you post. It will benefit you, and nobody else. Also, altough the books (like Richard's one, that's what you have, right?) are quite useful, they are aimed begginer levels. That's why they have a dual purpose: to present the technologies and to evangelize. The latter invariably pushes some concepts as rule of thumb way too far(altough I wouldn't blame the authors, the required leap in knowledge is quite large), promoting useful patterns into golden calfs, the most recurrent case being Session Facade. EJBs are, at the very core, pure Java. Many of the differences between them and regular Java objects are transient at best, since one of the main goals of J2EE itself is to provide a framework(including classes, interfaces, best practices, etc.) in which coding business objects is as easy as possible, making a larger number of developers able to produce typically complex applications. This also is one of the goals of other comparable, distributed computing technologies such as MTS/COM+ and CORBA. Thinking about EJBs as a "hack" of regular Java objects(or UML objects if you like) is the erroneous mindset to extract the most of EJBs. EJBs are Java Objects. Think of them as regular Java classes and interfaces leveraging a lot of standard services. It will make your life easier and your productivity higher. And again, my apologies for the tone, I have no excuse for that. My 2c, Juan Pablo Lorandi Chief Software Architect Code Foundry Ltd. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Barberstown, Straffan, Co. Kildare, Ireland. Tel: +353-1-6012050 Fax: +353-1-6012051 Mobile: +353-86-2157900 www.codefoundry.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 9:46 AM > To: Juan Pablo Lorandi > Subject: Re: ejb method signature-Why Cant EJB methods be > static-Group Plz. Contribute > > > > Thanks For Adding to my Knowledge. > I Hope you wont take that Personally ,its just that you are > making things clear > =========================================================================== 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".
