Another thought about the factory--it should cache an instance of each FileUtils type to minimize object creation. We can either just have it be known that FileUtilsAdapter impls should be stateless or have a StatelessFileUtilsAdapter interface--if implemented, cache, else don't.
thoughts? -Matt --- Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Kevin Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I found it in Kev's (long :) mail: > > > > > > > Sorry it was rather long, but there were a few > files > > packed in there! > > parenthetical smiley above. > > > > Since the other impls will be conditionally > > compiled, > > > we should use Class.forInstance()... > > > > > > > ok, so we use dynamic class-loading to get the > > correct fileutils? Is > > there an example in the code already of how I > should > > do this, (like in > > the ComplilerAdapter code perhaps?) > > > That's the way I understand it. Antoine cited > Regexp > factory stuff (o.a.t.a.util.regexp); it looks like > the > biggest lesson to take from here would be the use of > ClasspathUtils: > > return (FileUtilsAdapter) > ClasspathUtils.newInstance(className, > FileUtilsAdapter.class.getClassLoader(), > FileUtilsAdapter.class); > > -Matt > > [SNIP] > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
