On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:10:05 +0200, Adrian Lienhard wrote:

> On Jul 18, 2008, at 21:06 , Sebastian Sastre wrote:
>
>> glad to hear that I'm not alone with this industrial crisis. The only  
>> thing I
>> can think of is using sessions. So when a session is closed or expires  
>> the
>> system notifies remote brokers telling the group of ids of objects to be
>> considered free for that session (and of course eventually claimed if  
>> no other
>> session is referencing them). Maybe you want/need a more general  
>> approach? If we
>> deny to give up to consistency I don't see lots of alternatives. I'm  
>> starting to
>> wonder what happen in real world to solve this problematic pattern- 
>> problem...
>> hhmmm...
>
> For what its worth, there was a paper with the title "Programming with  
> Live Distributed Objects" published at this year's ECOOP. Not sure,  
> though, if/how they solve the problem.

Thanks for the pointer! Unfortunately words like "reachable",  
"unreachable", "circular", etc do not appear :( FWIW, it's more about  
type-safe drag&drop for some OLE-ish development framework but in  
javaneese, e.g. if(a type is B) etc :( But I will check the referred-to  
papers as well. Thanks.

/Klaus

> Cheers,
> Adrian
>
>