> What do you mean by "for use on clients"? Applets? More comments at the > end...
I meant thin-clients (applets, simple tools using dynamic proxies, etc.). > One question is whether the JVM will load unused classes in a jar file. > Assume a jar file is 1MB consisting of 1000 classes of which only 3 are > used. What is the memory footprint? The disk footprint is 1MB but is that > directly correlated with the memory footprint? If classes are loaded on a > need-only basis, then why would anyone care about the disk footprint, > unless the jar file is accessed from the network. Classes will be loaded from network. I guess it really comes down to: Does JBoss really need a wrapper around Log4j? Currently the popular answer is yes, due to the large size of the Log4j jar & the desired ability to simply turn off all logging on clients (EJB & JMS clients in the case of JBoss). My point is that it is possible to provide a clean abstraction of the primary logging interfaces from the nuts and bolts required to make it all work together at runtime. I believe this is what Commons Logging has tried to do, provide that abstraction. Any reason why Log4j does not provide this by itself (or does it)? --jason -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
