Conor MacNeill wrote:
>> >BTW, I don;t really agree with the <classloader> task being used to >> >modify >> > the effective classpath of running ClassLoaders. I'm sure this will >> > cause trouble too. >> >> Seems to break some of the "properties are immutable" philosophy of ant. > > No - not really an Ant level issue. I am concerned by the scenario where a > classloader with a child can not find a class on the first instance > causing the child to load the class. If that class is later added to the > loader's classpath, it becomes possible for parent to load the class and > then we have a parent and child loader with the same class loaded ----> > bad stuff happens. That's a pretty common case in tomcat or any container using reverse loaders, and usually nothing bad happens. Jboss is also using a flat loader where classes are added dynamically - and seems to be fine in most cases ( or at least more reliable than other alternative ). The <classloader> scheme is actually much safer than what jboss is using. I'm sure there will be some combination of loaders where <classloader> may generate an error, but it's better than any other scheme that I know or tried so far. Costin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
