I'm not sure if that should be as classForName or by passing the classloader but I see
the following needs:
What:
- load a resource (XML)
- load a class and package
- all validation provides available - see provider resolver
From where:
- from the user application or from the module depending on BV
- from a dependency of the application or module depending on BV
The second case is interesting, we need to know for example:
- if JPA is a dependency of the application
- find constraints and constraint validators contained in either the application directly
or in a dependency of the application
I am not sure how to do that in various modular environments. I also wonder if all of this
should be masked behind a contract like your describe, or if the list of classloaders
should be exposed to BV and processed. I am also not sure of the impact of object
lifecycle.
Emmanuel
On 4 mai 2012, at 12:11, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
Hi,
Seems everyone is tired of OSGi? Maybe adding the OSGi header is as far as we should go.
However, I would like to use this thread to a related question - class loading.
At several occasions Hibernate Validator needs to do some class loading or at least needs
a class loader
(e.g. loading classes specified in the xml configuration, detecting whether JPA is on
the classpath in the case
of TraversableResolver, loading resource bundles).
The spec does not define which class loader should be used in these cases. Hibernate
Validator for example
first tries the context and then the current class loader. The question is whether there
is a need to specify which
class loader should be used or should there even be a ClassLoaderService:
public interface ClassLoaderService {
public <T> Class<T> classForName(String className);
// potentially more class loader related methods
….
}
An implementation of such a service could be passed if we add
javax.validation.Configuration#classLoaderService(ClassLoaderService).
WDYT?
--Hardy
On Apr 24, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>
> On 13 avr. 2012, at 13:37, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
>
>> Emmanuel, you mentioned that we might align CDI in regards to OSGi. Are there any
news there?
>
> Not that I know of.
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev