ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: ClassLoaders ( was: Re: We need to stop the lies)
Date Thu, 28 Feb 2002 08:13:08 GMT
On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 04:33, wrote:
> - it seems that 'named' loaders are ok ( or nobody so far
> gave any argument against it ). By named loader I mean
> a mechanism to define new loaders ( and their classpaths),
> and a mechanism to use specific loader for different purposes
> like taskdefs or task execution

As long as it is not part of the core there should not be any problem.

> 2. Add a mechanism to request a particular loader to be associated
> with a task.
> 2.1. <taskdef loaderRef='foo' > will associate the task with a
> particular loader.


Create a ***NEW*** taskdef for all your new semantics.

> 2.4. ( Peter's request ) The LoaderManager should be able to
> control the loader used for each task:

No way is the kinks of this near being worked out yet. Needs far more testing 
to be even able to vote on it.

> Most of this proposal is very easy to implement and represents
> small ( and natural, IMHO ) extensions to the current
> model, with full backward compatibility and ( again IMHO )
> full control and flexibility for the user.

Implement it as tasks and you are much higher chance of getting it in.



| For those who refuse to understand, no explanation  |
| will ever suffice. For those who refuse to believe, |
| no evidence will ever suffice.                      |

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message