> > No, for reasons already stated. I would love to replace the > hand-coded caches in SourceCast with JCS, but I need an Object > interface. Our caches are currently transient; any objects which need > persistance are handled using the database. > -- It is not just persistence that you loose. With Objects you loose the distribution features as well.
Perhaps we can provide a separate interface that forces included elements to be strictly memory bound. Other future immutable regions, etc, will also be blocked. We could provide a GenericJCS access class that did the minor cleaning. I don't like the idea of getting unseriaizable exceptions from methods that ask for an Object. Aaron
