Re: Re: Re: Online mode architecture

Alex wrote:

> AspectWerkz won't be port to other bytecode kit until Q1 2004, even if we
> always take care to keep the architecture independant from bytecode kit
> (FYI we have a hook for Javassist already).

As I said, I don't think bytecode kit independence is necessarily worthwhile
for the AOP framework. You should just pick the best one and use it--but
the best one is not BCEL.

> AspectWerkz has already many dependancies and I don't think its worse to
> add a "useless" dependancy for AspectWerkz user (as a whole).

This is what I don't understand... It should only affect AspectWerkz
*developers*, or users who build from CVS, right? Users who needed to use
the ASM preprocessor would have to have the ASM jar at runtime, otherwise
it is only needed to compile the extra classes going into aspectwerkz-core.

But I don't really care, I'll put the extra files into cglib.jar, which will
need to be in bootclasspath anyway. I just figured you could attract more
users if the hook did not require bcel.jar. But now you can just point
users to CGLIB if the need arises :-)

Chris