Versioning -->
Versioning can be done by Byte code manipulation. Instead of maintaining
the state as a proxy, you can maintain the state in a list in the
manipulated class.
Remoting -->
has to be done through proxy, but abstract the user by the Inteceptor
sending the proxy based on the communication layer.
Karthik
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Bill
> Burke
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 10:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] AOP versioned ACID objects 1st iteration
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Jeff
> > Haynie
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 11:51 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] AOP versioned ACID objects 1st iteration
> >
> >
> >
> > >JBoss Remoting is much more fabulous. We need to get the
> word out on
> > it...
> >
> > I need to write some darn docs.. Too busy trying to get a
> new release
> > out on our side. Not enough hours in a day.
> >
> >
> > > I totally agree. And yes, a constructor pointcut is the
> way to go.
> > The only downside of constructor pointcuts is that
> reflection bypasses
> > the interception!
> > > Same thing with field interception. The problem is that unlike
> > methods, you have to modify the bytecode of the calling logic.
> >
> > Could you dynamically do an insertBefore into the
> CtConstructor of the
> > advised class which would do the interception, even on reflection?
> >
>
> I'm not sure...The problem with Versioning and Remoting is
> that a proxy
> object is required. You have to return a different object
> than the one
> actually constructed. You getting me? I'm not sure if this
> can be done
> within bytecode manipulation. I'll have to ask the Javassist guys.
>
> > > I will write some testcases that put the whole stack together with
> > constructor pointcuts.
> > >
> > > I'm also working on the concept of an abstract Container.
> But you got
> > me thinking that constructor pointcuts may be enough...
> >
> > I was just going to email you about the Container - just
> looking through
> > the code. Is this just the ability to create an AOP namespace or
> > something?
> >
>
> I guess you could think of it in that way and use it in that
> way, but the
> original intent was to handle things like dynamic loading through the
> persistence mechanism much in the same way an Entity Bean
> Container handles
> invocations on objects that are not in memory yet. You get
> what I'm saying?
>
> Bill
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> > The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
> > NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
> > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
> NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
