Issue 2540: _servant_postinvoke (java-rtf) Source: (, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Summary: It would be extremely useful for the _servant_postinvoke call to include the operation name since this is a logical place to hook into the POA"s servant locator postinvoke method - which needs the operation name. Without a provided operation name argument, this information must be saved in some other, potentially inconvenient, place. Resolution: closed, no change Revised Text: Actions taken: March 15, 1999: received issue January 9, 2001: closed issue Discussion: CLOSE, NO CHANGE because "This is typically stored in the ServantObject returned by _servant_preinvoke (or more correctly a vendor specific subclass of ServantObject). Considering that you have to store much more than just the operation name (i.e. the Cookie for ServantLocators) I'm not sure why the operation name is of particular concern." End of Annotations:===== Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:27:18 -031800 From: Matthew Newhook To: java-rtf@omg.org Subject: _servant_postinvoke Hi, It would be extremely useful for the _servant_postinvoke call to include the operation name since this is a logical place to hook into the POA's servant locator postinvoke method - which needs the operation name. Without a provided operation name argument, this information must be saved in some other, potentially inconvenient, place. Matthew -- Matthew Newhook E-Mail: mailto:matthew@ooc.com Software Designer WWW: http://www.ooc.com Object Oriented Concepts, Inc. Phone: (978) 439 9285 x 246 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 11:43:21 -0800 From: "George Scott" Organization: Inprise Corporation X-Accept-Language: en To: Matthew Newhook CC: java-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: _servant_postinvoke References: <19990315132718.A26641@wiley242h106.roadrunner.nf.net> Matthew Newhook wrote: > > Hi, > > It would be extremely useful for the _servant_postinvoke call to > include > the operation name since this is a logical place to hook into the > POA's > servant locator postinvoke method - which needs the operation > name. > > Without a provided operation name argument, this information must > be > saved in some other, potentially inconvenient, place. Hi Matthew, This is typically stored in the ServantObject returned by _servant_preinvoke (or more correctly a vendor specific subclass of ServantObject). Considering that you have to store much more than just the operation name (i.e. the Cookie for ServantLocators) I'm not sure why the operation name is of particular concern. Also, as an aside this method will be difficult to change because it is locked in the Java 2 core. So any change would have to be made by subclassing ObjectImpl and Delegate in a new package, which is not a particuarly pleasant idea. George