At 05:16 PM 5/2/2004, Pedro Salgado wrote:
On 04/05/02 23:50, "Michael McGrady" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is more of a passing interest of mine, so I will pursue a bit more, if > you continue an interest. I have an application that needs to do this from > afar on multiple and untrackable sites. So, the bouncing the server idea > just won't work for me. I need this to happen without exchanging > classloaders, and probably without fiddling with the classloader API. So, > this is my thought: that you have multiple dependencies is not important so > long as they all obey the "pattern" we were discussing, i.e., 1., 2., and > 3. So, any application framework that provided reloading only to the > requisite classes, those that followed this "pattern" would not be > "half-assed" at all but would be fully workable. One might even use a tag > interface, e.g. > Reloadable, to identify which classes had this sort of > independence. If all classes were created and were loaded on this sort of > structure, there would never be a need to bounce servers, etc. That, I > think, is a very workable solution, and another reason why using interfaces > is so important in designing architectures. Whew! That may be false but > it sure is ambitious. ///;-) >
Two years ago I attended a presentation about a "reflective component framework" called FORMAware.
It is way beyond than just reloading Struts actions but maybe there could be some ideas that could help you: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~corsaro/papers/RM2003/p18-moreira.pdf
Anyway I think this is good stuff so...
Regards,
Pedro Salgado
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
