"Scott M. Stirling" wrote:
>
> OK, I am thinking this is a pretty good idea now too, since seeing your
> and Marc's emails. My last two thoughts on the matter (just playing Devil's
> advocate):
That's good. It's easy to overlook some problems.
> 1. Doesn't it seem a bit sloppy to leave a bunch of classes loaded that
> will never get dumped unless the server is shutdown? Just a matter of
> elegance, I suppose.
Yes, it does. But AFAIK there's no way you can just unload a class
from the JVM; you would have to drop the class loader for the
context and reload all classes that are still valid. That doesn't
seem like the right thing to do in this situation IMHO.
> 2. What unforseen problems might arise in a large application with
> interdependencies, such as included files that are overlooked -- if an
> included file is deleted but the includer is not, what happens?
If it's included with the JSP directive, the includer will still
exist and be served, since the directive include works at translation
time. Tomcat (Jasper) doesn't keep track of the relationship to
included files, so it's similar to what happens if you change the
included file; nothing ;-)
If it's included using the JSP include action, a request for the
includer will fail, hopefully with a 404-like message. It's the
same as if you use an include action to include a JSP page or
servlet that has never existed.
Hans
--
Hans Bergsten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gefion Software http://www.gefionsoftware.com
Author of JavaServer Pages (O'Reilly), http://TheJSPBook.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
