> From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> > I think that the code for getCoreLoader() and the new 1.6
> classloader
> > code were two separate code paths that did not complete for 1.6.
> >
>
> the CoreLoader is an older attempt to setup Core loaders and
> was never really
> pro
> I think that the code for getCoreLoader() and the new 1.6 classloader
> code were
> two separate code paths that did not complete for 1.6.
>
the CoreLoader is an older attempt to setup Core loaders and was never really
progressed. It is pure legacy and is not effectively used. It predates 1.4,
First, I should say that classloader issues makes my head hurt.!
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, the optimization is that if the does not define a
classpath, a cached classloader is used. This
cached classloader gets set once (the first call).
Jos
> From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> No, the optimization is that if the does not define a
> classpath, a cached classloader is used. This
> cached classloader gets set once (the first call).
>
> Jose's more general caching solution souds more promising.
>
Peter, I could not
Please ignore. This last comment by me was added in a reply to the wrong
message.
On Friday 16 January 2004 11:18 am, Steve Cohen wrote:
> Well, we at commons-net would have been rushing the release to meet ant's
> "deadline" and there are internal refactorings which we would have liked to
> hav
Well, we at commons-net would have been rushing the release to meet ant's
"deadline" and there are internal refactorings which we would have liked to
have included that we were planning to postpone in the rush, but now will
take the time to get right, so I doubt that commons-net-1.2.0 will be do
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
Peter Reilly wrote:
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
I am +1 to get this into ant 1.6.1.
(in relation to static map of jarfile->manifest class path in
AntClassLoader2).
Ok I will commit that.
Another optimization I tried was a quick hack to DefBase to have a
static field co
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
I am +1 to get this into ant 1.6.1.
(in relation to static map of jarfile->manifest class path in
AntClassLoader2).
Ok I will commit that.
Another optimization I tried was a quick
Peter Reilly wrote:
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
I am +1 to get this into ant 1.6.1.
(in relation to static map of jarfile->manifest class path in
AntClassLoader2).
Ok I will commit that.
Another optimization I tried was a quick hack to DefBase to have a
static field containing the default classlo
> From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
>
> > I am +1 to get this into ant 1.6.1.
>
> (in relation to static map of jarfile->manifest class path in
> AntClassLoader2).
>
> Ok I will commit that.
>
> Another optimization I tried was a quick hack to De
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
I am +1 to get this into ant 1.6.1.
(in relation to static map of jarfile->manifest class path in
AntClassLoader2).
Ok I will commit that.
Another optimization I tried was a quick hack to DefBase to have a
static field containing the default classloader, so it
gets set
I am +1 to get this into ant 1.6.1.
Cheers,
Antoine
Peter Reilly wrote:
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
Hi Peter,
can we improve the new classloader so that the work of inspecting the
jars does not happen each time an is done ?
Yes by keeping a static map of file->manifest class path.
With the follo
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
Hi Peter,
can we improve the new classloader so that the work of inspecting the
jars does not happen each time an is done ?
Yes by keeping a static map of file->manifest class path.
With the following:
Done
and the included patch, the time
Hi Peter,
can we improve the new classloader so that the work of inspecting the
jars does not happen each time an is done ?
Antoine
Peter Reilly wrote:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Hi,
today I found myself discussing with the JPackage folks on their list
about the problems the RPM setup has with the ne
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Hi,
today I found myself discussing with the JPackage folks on their list
about the problems the RPM setup has with the new Launcher.
They put all the installed jars into a single directory and let config
files put together the classpath before they invoke Ant IIUC.
So far we'
Hi,
today I found myself discussing with the JPackage folks on their list
about the problems the RPM setup has with the new Launcher.
They put all the installed jars into a single directory and let config
files put together the classpath before they invoke Ant IIUC.
So far we've told people that
16 matches
Mail list logo
