A confusing steps in HF EJB

[Ko Ko Naing]

On page 94, step 5 says that "The bean is created" and step 6 says that "The EJBObject is made"... So the bean is created before the EJBObject is made...
but on page 100, step 4 says that "The EJBObject is created/instantiated for the bean" and step 5 says that "Te bean itself is instantiated". So here it means that the EJBObject is created first for the bean and the bean is instantiated later... or does it mean only to stateful session beans?
Could anyone please explain these confusing steps? Thanks a lot...

[Dale Seng]

I think page 94 is a simplification (it says "overview"). The diagram on 179 agrees with the one on 100.
--Dale--
[ April 06, 2004: Message edited by: Dale Seng ]

[Ko Ko Naing]

Originally posted by Dale Seng:
I think page 94 is a simplification (it says "overview"). The diagram on 179 agrees with the one on 100.
--Dale--
[ April 06, 2004: Message edited by: Dale Seng ]

Dale, do u mean that overview is leading the readers to be confused? I also think that the EJBObject should be created first... Then bean instantiation follows later...
Is it an errata that others overlooked?

[Roger Chung-Wee]

As a reference to the EJB Object can be obtained from ejbCreate(), then the EJBObject must be created before the bean instance.

[Dale Seng]

Originally posted by Roger Chung-Wee:
As a reference to the EJB Object can be obtained from ejbCreate(), then the EJBObject must be created before the bean instance.

That's a good point. It sounds like the diagram on 94 is wrong. I'd say someone should go to http://www.oreilly.com/cgi-bin/errata.form/hfjejb and write it up. It's not my discovery, or I'd do it.
--Dale--

[Ko Ko Naing]

Originally posted by Dale Seng:

That's a good point. It sounds like the diagram on 94 is wrong. I'd say someone should go to http://www.oreilly.com/cgi-bin/errata.form/hfjejb and write it up. It's not my discovery, or I'd do it.
--Dale--

It's a good idea so that there will be less errata in the later printings of the book... But I think even if we post it there, it will be piled into unconfirmed errata pages...

[Bert Bates]

Due to current time pressure, I haven't looked at this issue, but I will say that a new batch of errata fixes should be posted very soon! We'll annouce it on this forum when it's available.
Hope that helps,
Bert