[jsr294-modularity-eg] Runtime model
Andreas.Sterbenz at Sun.COM
Mon Jul 16 17:14:10 EDT 2007
Bryan Atsatt wrote:
> So. Let me invert the question: why *not* support runtime binding?
Earlier  you said:
> While I think development time class rewriting is likely a decent
> solution, it would be unreasonably complex/expensive if deferred to
> runtime. Does anyone have a use case for binding legacy classes to a
> superpackage at runtime?
Do you have a use case now? If not, we should not let code at runtime
change the semantics of application class files and avoid the
complications and other problems that would introduce.
More information about the jsr294-modularity-eg