thanx, it indeed can replace DRbUndumped, but with the same consequence: 
it is still a pass-by-reference thing, which is rather dangerous to be 
used when working with tuplespace's read operation.

consider this, what if two clients read the same object written by some 
server, and one of the client modifies the object (hoping it would only 
change his "copy of object"). using DRbUndumped or this alternative 
marshalling is a bad method, since the object would still appear changed 
on both clients.

what i really need is a pass-by-value marshalling so that the one 
written into the space is actually the copy of the real object, and not 
the reference to it. can anyone help me? i believe the drawback of 
having the client to own physical copy of the object's class (i.e. the 
object's source code) is not something to be worried about. or is there 
any other disadvantage of using pass-by-value compared to using 
pass-by-reference, maybe speed / execution time?

i currently combine Rinda::TupleSpace and Rinda::Ring instead of putting 
the tuplespace as a DRbServer's front object, trying to make the whole 
thing works like jini

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.