Is there any way to deprecate the current frowned upon usage of require and release a new point release of JRuby before 1.2? It seems a little harsh to simply remove something that used to work (even poorly) without giving people a nice way of checking their code for this problem. Rails seems to do this nicely. If you can run the latest minor release of rails without deprecation warnings then you can likely upgrade to the next major release without much pain.
Joe On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Thomas E Enebo <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:31 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Stephen Bannasch wrote: > >> > >> At 8:38 PM -0600 2/16/09, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > >>> > >>> I'm working on http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JRUBY-3214 and I think > we > >>> need to ratchet down what load and require do when loading .class > files. > >>> They've started to get overloaded for loading an individual Java class, > >>> which was never the intended purpose. This generally circumvents normal > Java > >>> classloading and classpath and usually causes things to break, since > you can > >>> easily load in a single class but fail to load its dependencies. > >>> > >>> So I propose the following: > >>> > >>> load and require shall only be used for loading .jar files (as an > analog > >>> to extensions), .rb files, or .class files that represent compiled .rb > >>> files. > >>> > >>> The problem in the bug is that it tries first to do a normal class > load, > >>> which sees the current directory's "baz" class and loads it before the > >>> "baz.class" in ../foo. When normal Java classloading is taken out of > the > >>> equation, it works correctly. > >>> > >>> This also will affect classloading somewhat; since a given classloader > >>> can only load a given package + class once, and with Ruby load paths > there > >>> could potentially be multiple compiled .rb files with the same Java > package > >>> and class, each precompiled .rb file will be loaded in its own child > >>> classloader and executed. > >> > >> Are you proposing any changes to how require operates when loading a jar > >> that implements BasicLibraryService.basicLoad? > >> > >> This service is normally used to add Ruby modules and classes. This > >> technique is used in the java/jruby versions of RubyGems like hpricot > and > >> redcloth. > > > > No, this would remain the same. The only behavior that would change is > > using: > > > > require 'some.java.Class' > > > > as a way of getting that class loaded and callable. It will now raise an > > error saying you should use 'java_import' to load it in (I could have > said > > "import" but "java_import" is probably more likely to work in all cases, > > since rake defines an import method and a few people have run into issues > > with that). > > > > e.g. > > > > $ jruby -rjava -e "load 'build/classes/jruby/org/jruby/RubyString.class'" > > -e:1:in `load': use `java_import' to load normal Java classes (LoadError) > > from -e:1 > > +1 > > I am sure someone has tried using it, but for it to still be working > for them they ended up solving the class loading using a different > way. > > -Tom > > -- > Blog: http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ThomasEEnebo > Email: [email protected] , [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
