Sorry, meant ObjectINPUTStream... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Keim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Geert Bevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Steven Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 11:42 AM Subject: Re: [tc-dev] Named Classloaders
> >From ObjectOutputStream.resolveClass: > > The default implementation of this method in > ObjectInputStream returns the result of calling > > Class.forName(desc.getName(), false, loader) > > where loader is determined as follows: if there is a > method on the current thread's stack whose declaring class was > defined by a user-defined class loader (and was not a generated to > implement reflective invocations), then loader is class > loader corresponding to the closest such method to the currently > executing frame; > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Geert Bevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Steven Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:44 PM > Subject: Re: [tc-dev] Named Classloaders > > >> Doesn't serialization just use the caller's current classloader? >> >> On 22 May 2007, at 23:42, Steven Harris wrote: >> >>> I think we can follow the same rules that serialization follow >>> about choosing classloaders but I'm not sure. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Steven Harris >>> >>> Director of Engineering >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> www.terracotta.org >>> >>> >>> >>> On May 22, 2007, at 2:38 PM, Geert Bevin wrote: >>> >>>> What about classes that are loaded through another classloader >>>> (ie. an application having several classloaders). How well TC be >>>> able to automatically tell which classloader it has to retrieve it >>>> from, if it isn't named? >>>> >>>> On 22 May 2007, at 23:22, Steven Harris wrote: >>>> >>>>> This is something that has come up a few times over the last few >>>>> years. Alex mentioned a solution and gkeim mentioned a similar >>>>> solution. >>>>> I want to schedule a brain storming session on it in the coming >>>>> weeks >>>>> but... >>>>> >>>>> Since I don't believe we ever push objects to a client anymore, at >>>>> least not all the way to instantiation, I believe we can just use >>>>> the >>>>> classloader of requesting client. This may not >>>>> have always been true but I think it is true now. What reasons >>>>> can we >>>>> think of that would require us to need named classloaders anymore? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Geert Bevin >>>> Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org >>>> Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com >>>> RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org >>>> Music and words - http://gbevin.com >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> tc-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev >> >> -- >> Geert Bevin >> Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org >> Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com >> RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org >> Music and words - http://gbevin.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tc-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > tc-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev > _______________________________________________ tc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
