Hi,
In the PB howto, it mentions that it's typical and fine to get bidirectional synchronization between objects by inheriting from both pb.Copyable and pb.RemoteCopy. Is the case the same when it comes to Cacheable?
I've wondered about it too, and after thinking about it I decided it was a bad idea. In the copy case (which works fine) you get a one-time copy through serialization when doing remote methods. In the Cacheable case though, objects get changed on the other side due to changes on the one side. So in practice, what does that mean when side A changes the same object as side B ? What do you do with conflicting changes ? It seems to me you have no predictable way of resolving clashing changes. So I ended up not wanting to deal with those situations and worked around my need for this. Now, I do think in practice it will probably work, just not reliably and very hard to debug when it doesn't do what you expected. Write a small test app and give it a try. Thomas Dave/Dina : future TV today ! - http://www.davedina.org/ <-*- thomas (dot) apestaart (dot) org -*-> The girl that I could never hurt had to go and lose all that power over me and I claimed victory <-*- thomas (at) apestaart (dot) org -*-> URGent, best radio on the net - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.fm/