Re: [fortress / excalibur] JDK 1.2 dynamic proxies: implementation question, to CGLIB or...

On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:30, Neeme Praks wrote:
> Chris (one of the CGLIB developers) wrote to me this:
>  > Also, I'm not sure what led to Peter's concerns, but the library
>  > actually goes to quite some trouble to make the creation and execution
>  > of the generated code as fast as possible, through proper caching,
>  > etc. The jar itself is only 60k not including BCEL.
>
> So, I would prefer using CGLIB and improve that if there are places for
> improvement. Anyway, CGLIB seems to have at least a "community" around
> it, developing and maintaining it. All code in BCEL seems to be pretty
> much frozen...

Thats fine with me - I just have used BCEL before and could maintain the code 
whereas with CGLIB it will probably be up to you to do it. I have never 
looked at CGLIB properly so it may be just as easy but I aint gonna volunteer 
to do the work - if you are then go for it ! ;)

It would be great to kill ECM dead - finally!

> Well, if there are some other projects (like CGLIB) that could be in the
> BCEL scope, then I think that the code should have been moved to BCEL
> instead... But probably it was thought to be out-of-scope for BCEL...

No idea. Always possible to make noise on BCEL and/or general lists and it may 
spark a fire ... or may not.

-- 
Cheers,

Peter Donald
------------------------------------------------
 "No. Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try." 
                                     -- Yoda 
------------------------------------------------