Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
>> Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>>> Just out of curiosity, what price would that be?
>> I'd guess disk. To turn it around to you, I'd ask why did Eclipse
>> add the feature and adopt it in all of their SDK plugins?
> Beats me. Personally, I'm not much in favor of this new "feature". It
> would be different if Eclipse provided some functionality to flatten
> the jars into one but that's not what's happening. As it stands now I
> think that: what you gain in disk space is lost in memory consumption.
> You'll need to unpack the stuff at some point anyway right? I also
> think you loose performance at boot time since you make life harder
> for the classloaders.
>
> It might look pretty and give you a warm fuzzy feeling when looking in
> the plugins directory but I don't think there's any gain whatsoever
> for the end user. And for the developer? Well, as we see here, it
> simply doesn't work.
In the version we submitted for our Eclipse proposal, each of these JARS
within a JAR is now its own plugin. So the issue would go away anyway
once we get moved to that architecture.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 28 22:09:50 2006