On 12/01/2008, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sahoo wrote: > > Richard S. Hall wrote: > >> > >> In R4.1, class loading is currently the only defined trigger that > >> causes deferred activation. > > It's exactly this choice of trigger that had confused me earlier. I am > > not sure why Bundle.loadClass was chosen as the trigger for deferred > > activation. Any way, that does not stop me from making progress. > > Thanks for your nice explanation. > > Well, the idea was that if someone was loading a class from the bundle, > then it is a sign that the bundle is actually needed, thus it causes it > to be activated.
also, I think I'm right in saying that if a client bundle resolved against the bundle it wouldn't trigger the activation - it's only when code in the client bundle actually causes a loadClass(), and this could be some time after the resolution step... -> richard > > > > > Thanks, > > Sahoo > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Cheers, Stuart
