Hadn't thought of that.
Spike
Samuel Neff wrote:
> Even if you can't cache the object instance due to the type of object, you
> can always cache the class reference itself (the return of loader.loadClass)
> and use that to repeatedly call newInstance() which would not cause
> performance problems as compared to cfobject/createobject.
>
> Sam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 3:04 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: using jars without classpath?
>
>
> Forgot to mention the issues in that last message.
>
> The main issue is the speed. It will take quite a lot longer to load
> classes with the URLClassLoader than if they are on the classpath. The
> other one is having to add all of the paths and jars to the array you
> use to initialize the URLClassLoader.
>
> Speed can sometimes be overcome by caching the instantiated objects
> depending on the objects themselves. The adding of paths and JARs is
> just a matter of knowing what your java code is referencing.
>
> Spike
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
