So I have tracked this down to what I think is a bug in the iiop registry
implementation. I think it is too strict.
Suppose the following:
class A extends B {
}
class B implements java.io.Serializable {
private A[] theAs;
...
}
During the mapping process of A all of its refernced types are mapped as well
and it reaches up to its parent classes/intf which in this case is B. Then all
of Bs referenced types are mapped which in this case includes the reference
back down to the A class which the registry throws out as the type already
being mapped.
I know that the reference back down to a child from the parent is a bit strange
and not so OO but the object model is already in place and I have to work w/
what is here.
Is there any rmi-iiop consistency/validity rules that would be violated by this
type of relation or is this just a too strict implementation of the iiop
registry?
Thanks
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3862604#3862604
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3862604
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
JBoss-user mailing list
JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
