<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hello Terracotta</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tech.puredanger.com/index.php/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/</link>
	<description>Alex Miller&#039;s technical blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:39:50 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/comment-page-1/#comment-108389</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:51:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/#comment-108389</guid>
		<description>None in this case - since that field is a Terracotta root, it is effectively &quot;static&quot; in that the field value is shared by all instances already.  The main difference is that you&#039;re still bound by Java language conventions on how and where that field is accessed in static vs non-static context so sometimes it&#039;s more convenient to do one vs the other.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>None in this case &#8211; since that field is a Terracotta root, it is effectively &#8220;static&#8221; in that the field value is shared by all instances already.  The main difference is that you&#8217;re still bound by Java language conventions on how and where that field is accessed in static vs non-static context so sometimes it&#8217;s more convenient to do one vs the other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/comment-page-1/#comment-108387</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/#comment-108387</guid>
		<description>If I used private static final Set , whats the behaviour difference , if any

thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I used private static final Set , whats the behaviour difference , if any</p>
<p>thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kablooie! &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Revenge of Hello Terracotta</title>
		<link>http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/comment-page-1/#comment-35682</link>
		<dc:creator>Kablooie! &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Revenge of Hello Terracotta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/#comment-35682</guid>
		<description>[...] When my manager Alex first started at Terracotta, he blogged a simple Hello Terracotta example to demonstrate POJO clustering in action. When I first started last month, he walked me through this same example and went into quite a bit more depth, decompiling some code and showing me a glimpse of how client POJO&#8217;s are instrumented by Terracotta and thus plug into our clustering framework. Here&#8217;s what we did. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] When my manager Alex first started at Terracotta, he blogged a simple Hello Terracotta example to demonstrate POJO clustering in action. When I first started last month, he walked me through this same example and went into quite a bit more depth, decompiling some code and showing me a glimpse of how client POJO&#8217;s are instrumented by Terracotta and thus plug into our clustering framework. Here&#8217;s what we did. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/comment-page-1/#comment-16601</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:55:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/#comment-16601</guid>
		<description>@Mouad: When Terracotta instruments the bytecode, it will remove the &quot;final&quot; modifier for roots, so this is not an issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mouad: When Terracotta instruments the bytecode, it will remove the &#8220;final&#8221; modifier for roots, so this is not an issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mouad</title>
		<link>http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/comment-page-1/#comment-16580</link>
		<dc:creator>Mouad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 09:35:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.puredanger.com/2007/08/08/hello-terracotta/#comment-16580</guid>
		<description>Hi all,

I don&#039;t think using final Set would, that will definitly be throw as an error by the compiler.

Best regards,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi all,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think using final Set would, that will definitly be throw as an error by the compiler.</p>
<p>Best regards,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

