-
1. Re: why must fields be public
dsundstrom Apr 23, 2002 4:38 PM (in response to gzhong)This is required by the EJB 1.1 specification. Don't worry about access, because all clients have to access your bean using the remote interface.
If this still irks you, upgrade to JBoss 3.0 and use CMP 2.0. In CMP 2.0 you don't have fields, you just define abstract methods to access your persistent fields. -
2. Re: why must fields be public
gzhong Apr 23, 2002 7:46 PM (in response to gzhong)Ah, I see now. THat also explains why there is a discrepancy between what I found from the Sun EJB tutorial and the JBoss tutorial. On the Sun tutorial they use these abstract methods. ANyway, JBoss 3.0 is still beta. Is it stable enough for development use only (I am just using it for teaching myself EJB, not for any real life project). Is there a timeline for it being non-beta?
Thanks again!
G -
3. Re: why must fields be public
dsundstrom Apr 23, 2002 11:07 PM (in response to gzhong)> ANyway, JBoss 3.0 is still beta.
Actually, it is at release canidate 1. Check the files section at sourceforge.
> Is it stable enough for development
> use only (I am just using it for teaching myself EJB,
> not for any real life project).
Yes. -
4. EJB 2.0 useful?
gzhong Apr 24, 2002 10:24 AM (in response to gzhong)Ah, so JBoss 3.0 implements EJB 2.0. Is EJB 2.0 widely implemented? I know Sun obviously implements it, what about other big EJB containers? I don't know how long EJB 2.0 has been around.
Thanks again,
G -
5. Re: EJB 2.0 useful?
dsundstrom Apr 24, 2002 11:31 AM (in response to gzhong)> Ah, so JBoss 3.0 implements EJB 2.0. Is EJB 2.0
> widely implemented? I know Sun obviously implements
> it, what about other big EJB containers?
Yes, it is a huge feature of EJB 2.0.
> I don't know how long EJB 2.0 has been around.
In final form about 6 months, but the spec was in development for over a year.