>Richard Sitze wrote: >> >> >> 2. Make the minor mods to LogKit and Log4J >> >> (the two predominant open-source logging API's) >> >> to eliminate overhead of wrappers entirely when >> >> used with the framework... >> > >> >Here is the deal with that approach: >> > >> >Requiring a supposedly self-contained jar to implement interfaces from an >> >external project now REQUIRES all users of the jar to now incorporate that >> >other jar. Either that, or include the other jar inside the >> self-contained >> >jar. That would mean that both LogKit and Log4J would be required to >> include >> >the contents of the shared interface jar. Can you imagine the classloader >> >issues? >> >> Why? The framework guarentees that only one of them gets loaded into the >> JVM.. >> the other isn't needed. > >Two reasons: > >1) Compilation >2) Classloader > >If you implement an interface, it MUST be in the same classloader--otherwise >you get a ClassNotFoundError, and logging will not be available. UNLESS the >required jar is available.
You misunderstood me, I think. Only one of the implementations is going to be loaded... I'd expect the jar file to be available. The framework should guarentee that only one factory is invoked to initialize an implementation of the interface... after the first factory, others are ignored. I'm trying to be consistent with discussions with Peter. Thanks, <ras> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
