Peter,
Sorry dude, after reading it back it is not the solve-all suggestion I thought it was (even though you never understood it). It was a good suggestion for namespace but it needless used classes to communicate that uniqueness.
- Paul
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001 21:27, Paul Hammant wrote:
Peter,
This and the other email. I like a lot. I think you'll have trouble with <join>, but you knew I'd say that ;-)
;)
The multiple "foo" scenario, which is a real namespace issue, could it not be address java-package style? :
org.apache.avalon.fooservice.FooClassLoaderNode
Not sure what you mean? Do you mean ask users to use classloader names with a specific format in their blocks. So if we had a block
org.apache.avalon.fooservice.FooBlock
It should use classloader
org.apache.avalon.fooservice.FooClassLoader
???
What happens when multiple Blocks all require the same resources? Or worse require same resources but different versions ? Do we support this or not??
We could actually have an interface called ClassLoaderNode that a real class could impl. It has in it some getters that pheonix could use for semi-hard coded checking against the assembly manifest? ... similar to <required> functionality of manifest. It is class loaded by full class name via the getClassLoader() as you described.
Parsing sentence ... syntax valid.
Semantic error: Compiler unable to determine what the hell you are on about
;)
Pretend I am stupid and explain it to me in those terms.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
