Stefano Ceccherini wrote: >>And It's definitely not acceptable that it creates a new >reply port for >>every construction. Sure thing! > Yeah, there was a small discussion some weeks ago on the list. > What about using a static reply port here too ? It would be managed by the > static lock, > so it shouldn't run into concurrency problems. > We would create it when BApplication calls InitData(), and destroy it when > the BApplication dies. > Or we could use the BApplication's reply port (as Adi suggested in the > mentioned discussion). > But I don't know if it's feasible. There is _no_ problem! Use BApplication::fServerTo. bye, Adi.