Apologies for opening TUSCANY-1678 without noticing the earlier JIRA or this discussion.
On 9/7/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I didn't quite get Raymond's comment that we'll have to pass a flag in a > message header. Don't we know what to do w.r.t pass by value just by > looking at the source and target interfaces? Can't we just decide to > either insert the interceptor in the invocation chain or not when the > invocation chain is built? One problem with deciding when the invocation chain is built is supporting the case where a service-side binding impl accepts requests from either local or remote-JVM clients (the 2nd case in TUSCANY-1678). The local client may require a copy while not the remote one. Also are we sure the presence of a DataTransformationInteceptor on the chain means a copy has been done? Is that part of the SPI contract? Say you had a databinding which transformed Java complex types from one system to another but did nothing with a simple java.lang.Integer. Is it established that the databinding impl should do a copy in that case? Those reasons are why I was thinking too that we might want to use a flag.... Scott
