avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephen McConnell" <mcconn...@osm.net>
Subject RE: JDK 1.4beta and DefaultConfigurationBuilder
Date Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:29:01 GMT

Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Peter Donald wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:17, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> > > Have just completed a build of Avalon and Phoenix over JDK1.4
> > > beta. Everything's fine except for the 
> > > DefaultConfigurationBuilder source - the CVS version contains  
> > > commented out code that's consistent with the XML parser 
> > > libraries including in the 1.4 runtime.  Now that I've updated 
> > > the source to be consitent with 1.4, my source is now  
> > > inconsistent with the CVS and I was wondering if something is 
> > > planned concerning any synchronisation in this area?
> > 
> > I actually run a patched version locally to use JAXP ... the 
> > reason it is commented out is just for backwards compatibility. 
> > Also partially because JAXP was broken in some installations 
> > (would load only from same classloader jaxp is in rather than
> > context classloader).
> The way around that is to keep the JAXP out of the base classloader, 
> and add the parser you want when you need it.

Don't know how your going to do that in 1.4.  The XML related classes 
are inside rt.jar (including Sax and DOM parsers) which means that you 
can't bypass this by overriding the extension directories. Secondly, 
there are build time issues that are introduced (i.e. the assumptions 
about what's in the boot classpath and the supplementary classes needed 
in the general classpath change between 1.3 and 1.4).

> I think the current version is the best alternative.  We can add 
> back in the constructor with the classname if you want.

I think you need something like two alternative implementation classes - 
for example, the current DefaultConfigurationBuilder (for compatibility) 
and a new JAXPConfigurationBuilder. The JAXPConfigurationBuilder 
compilation could be excluded with a few lines in the ant build file if 
the javax.xml classes are unavailable.  At runtime we can test the vm 
version (or available classes) in order to select the actual builder 
class to use.

> Quick Poll:
> Who uses anything besides the default constructor?

Only the default until earlier this morning ;-)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

View raw message