Peter, Sorry dude, after reading it back it is not the solve-all suggestion I thought it was (even though you never understood it). It was a good suggestion for namespace but it needless used classes to communicate that uniqueness.
- Paul >On Sat, 1 Dec 2001 21:27, Paul Hammant wrote: > >>Peter, >> >>This and the other email. I like a lot. I think you'll have trouble >>with <join>, but you knew I'd say that ;-) >> > >;) > >>The multiple "foo" scenario, which is a real namespace issue, could it >>not be address java-package style? : >> >> org.apache.avalon.fooservice.FooClassLoaderNode >> > >Not sure what you mean? Do you mean ask users to use classloader names with a >specific format in their blocks. So if we had a block > >org.apache.avalon.fooservice.FooBlock > >It should use classloader > >org.apache.avalon.fooservice.FooClassLoader > >??? > >What happens when multiple Blocks all require the same resources? Or worse >require same resources but different versions ? Do we support this or not?? > >>We could actually have an interface called ClassLoaderNode that a real >>class could impl. It has in it some getters that pheonix could use for >>semi-hard coded checking against the assembly manifest? ... similar to >><required> functionality of manifest. It is class loaded by full class >>name via the getClassLoader() as you described. >> > >Parsing sentence ... syntax valid. >Semantic error: Compiler unable to determine what the hell you are on about > >;) > >Pretend I am stupid and explain it to me in those terms. > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
