Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: 216.86.168.178 is neither permitted
 nor denied by domain of geir@pobox.com)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
In-Reply-To: <45C9BF49.9000308@gmail.com>
References: <67FA1FDB-756B-4710-8C0F-2BCDC8599C4E@pobox.com>
 <f982cec50702070028u1e49fbe6n81d7a9dc948def7a@mail.gmail.com>
 <45C9BF49.9000308@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <21F476A3-A2B7-4186-B4D2-378F25D2E8B8@pobox.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <geir@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [drlvm] The Return of the Hidden Classloader, Part II
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 07:07:56 -0500
To: dev@harmony.apache.org


On Feb 7, 2007, at 7:00 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:

> Yang Paulex wrote:
>> 2007/2/7, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>:
>>>
>>> This is an oldie but goodie..
>>>
>>> We never solved the problem of how to hide non java*. packages that
>>> are on the boot classpath from apps.  We talked about a few
>>> possibilities :
>>>
>>> 1) repackage them to a different package namespace
>>>
>>> 2) have a "hidden" classloader that only the system classloader  
>>> can use.
>>>
>>> I like #2.  Has anyone looked into this or made any progress?  Do
>>> people think this is as important as I do?
>>
>>
>> +1, the hidden classloader so far seems a better way to go, but  
>> for long
>> term, I wish the JSR 277[1] or JSR 291[2] can be considered to  
>> address this
>> kind of issue in general.
>>
>> [1] http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=277
>> [2] http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=291
>
> True, but in the meantime it sounds like we need a tactical  
> solution to
> the problems that Robin and Geir and others have been having.
>
> Rather than a hidden class loader we can filter the app classloader's
> delegation to the bootclassloader so it only gets an opportunity to  
> load
> API types.  Let me have a quick play ...
>

Yes - that's the same concept, but I can see how that's going to be  
easier, because there's less machinery needed to figure out who is  
asking.  If you don't mind, I'll take a wack.

geir

> Regards,
> Tim