One note, my comments below only apply to the package name for generated
classes for those JSP pages compiled at runtime. What package name is
used for precompiled JSP pages using JspC.java is not an issue.
Glenn
Glenn Nielsen wrote:
Kin-Man Chung wrote:
See below.
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:03:08 +0100
From: Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: cvs commit:
jakarta-tomcat-jasper/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper JspC.java
To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Then why not default to the context path ?
Can you give examples ? It's very hard to determine the context path
from JSPC IMO.
I think the naming conventions for the generated servlets should be
settled down, documented - and treated as APIs ( i.e. no change
unless absolutely needed ).
Ok, but in the meantime, we must not allow non packaged classes.
When I wrote my patch, I also felt that a default package prefix was
a good idea, but I dropped it in the end due to the package/directory
structure mismatch. If it's really important to, you should also make
sure the class files are generated in a directory structure that
starts
with "org/apache/jsp/"
I was wondering about that, actually, and thought this was
inconsistent.
JSPC does generate the right package directory structure. I think
JspServlet
should do the same - if it doesn't already.
Well, I don't think we care. JspServlet generates in the workdir, and
uses one CL per page. So packaging is not relevant IMO.
OTOH, JSPC may generate the classes in /WEB-INF/classes, so we would
need to create the full package structure. I'd like to point out that
you admin precompilation example does include an extra "admin"
subfolder in the output directory path.
Remy
Well, there is one case that generating the classes with the same package
name would cause problem, and that is when you have two JSP pages with
the
same file name (but in different directories). Still not a problem in
class loading, since the class files are placed in different directories,
but you cannot debug them anymore since you cannot identify the
classes by
name - they have the same name.
Anyone knows why it was done this way?
I did some refactoring of the JasperClassLoader and the package naming
over a year ago. The code for all this in Jasper had been very convoluted
and added a great deal of overhead. The refactoring improved runtime JSP
performance by 33% and compilation by 25%. If you search the tomcat-dev
archives you can find the detailed description of what was changed and why.
I am -1 for changing the default package name for JSP pages compiled at
runtime
from org.apache.jsp to something else until all the implication of doing
this
are thought through.
Jean-Francois mentioned that there are SecurityManager issues related to
changing the package name.
Glenn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glenn Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | /* Spelin donut madder |
MOREnet System Programming | * if iz ina coment. |
Missouri Research and Education Network | */ |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glenn Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | /* Spelin donut madder |
MOREnet System Programming | * if iz ina coment. |
Missouri Research and Education Network | */ |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
