On Jun 28, 2006, at 2:29 PM, Gregg Wonderly wrote: > Stefan Tilkov wrote: > > I agree that contract-first is preferable to code-first. What was > > referring to, though, was something different: I believe a "service" > > is something that is semantically different from a distributed > > objects's interface, not just a different messaging protocol. That's > > why I'm deeply suspicious of any toolkit that "just" maps CORBA, > DCOM > > or RMI to SOAP ... > > I continue to struggle with the fact that people somehow seem to > believe that > you can't pass documents in an RMI call. Stefen, what makes you > feel that an > existing RMI application would always be a badly performing > application? Can > you discuss your experiences with RMI applications which performed > normal method > calls, callbacks for eventing and large data transfers to help me > understand > your experiences and how those might be metering your views? > > Gregg Wonderly > My main point (in this case) is not that there's anything *wrong* with RMI, but that an RMI interface is something *different* than a service interface.
That said, I do believe RMI is a tightly coupled technology that should only be used (in the mainstream way) for systems, usually single applications, where tight coupling is acceptable (very few, in my experience). Unless, of course, you do use RMI to pass documents -- which one can do, but is rarely done. Stefan ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/NhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
