2006/12/4, Pavel Pervov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hope, these changes didn't make their way to the SVN yet... See below.
Pavel, thank you for explicit argumentation. Answers are inlined below, too.
[snip]
I believe, I can shed some light on the decision of making SetBCPElement available to the public. Magics are different from the rest of the jars in the way they belong to the respective components, which provide these jars.
They are no way different than kernel.jar, which belongs to vmcore. Just a matter of modular packaging, nothing more.
I don't see it as advantage for these jars to be available through any public APIs for browsing - including system properties.
I can see some advantages - e.g. being clear and predictable. Similar arguments you can find in the very beginning of this thread, btw. So if you see no disadvantages either, we better change this. That is why it was
suggested to Mikhail (Fursov; I believe there was a discussion on dev-list on this topic) to implement it the way, it is now. > > Do you believe that adding jars directly is no good? > I prefer to have the consistent way. > IMHO BootstrapClassLoader::SetBCPElement() should not be public, it is > just a part of BootstrapClassLoader initialization and not intended > for regular usage. It is not exactly "regular use". Still, if you insist on keeping SetBCPElement() private, merge the code from bootstrap_add_components_classpath with the BootstrapClassLoader initialization code.
Usually they call it a "hack", when an public API is there but not meant for regular use ;) So I will do as you suggest, move it to BootstrapClassLoader::Initialize(). -- Alexey
