Geert Krekelberg

There is only one Home for each bean type. So an isIdentical method for the home would be ludicrous. I meant to ask whether this remark in the book was intentional or a mistake. As far as I can see, it's a mistake, but then again, I'm just starting on the topic.

In the HF EJB book, on page 148 the thoughts on isIdentical() says:

...to let you compare two home or component interface references...

isIdentical is defined in EJBObject, not in EJBHome, so where do the home interfaces come in?

More like this:
//file Common.java public interface Common { public void method1() throws RemoteException; } //file ComponentInterface.java public interface ComponentInterface extends Common { // no definitions here } //file SomeBean.java public abstract class SomeBean implements Common { public void method1() { //do something... } }

Geert.
[ August 11, 2004: Message edited by: Geert Krekelberg ]

Notwithstanding all the interesting (and fully agreeable) discussions on why not to use it, this:

It�s not just because the interface declares an exception that your implemetation must declare it.

is the answer to the original question, which I was looking for.

Thanks, Geert.

I just started reading the Head First EJB book. Sorry if this question already has been asked, but I couldn't find it here.

The design on page 86 (and the brainpower question on page 22) suggest the use of a common interface for both the component interface and the bean.

But the methods in the component interface must throw the RemoteException, where the methods in the bean should not.

How can a single interface be used here?

Geert.