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

[Neeme Praks]

Peter Donald wrote:

On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:11, Neeme Praks wrote:

>When implementing dynamic proxies for JDK 1.2, we have two choices:
>1. I have cooked up an implementation for generating dynamic proxy
>classes with BCEL, but it still needs some more work to make it ready
>for production use.

I would prefer this because I assume it is small and lightweight and does not
have any overhead but poking through CGLIB looks like it does.

However it is up to you. If you don't want to support the code or can't get it
into BCEL or whatever then CGILIB may be an option. However if we go that
path I would prefer that CGILIB only got used under jdk1.2 and native proxys got used in jdk1.3+

Well, we can do some performance testing later...
Chris (one of the CGLIB developers) wrote to me this:
> Hi again Neeme,
>
> Saw your message to avalon-dev (I read the archives of a lot of apache
> lists :-). Any help with documentation and testing of CGLIB would be
> appreciated, if you decide to use it.
>
> 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...

>Was it really part of Jakarta Commons?
I think so (at least it has the same authors).
>Why did it leave?
good question.

Nobody knows? I couldn't find anything in the commons-dev list archives either... Chris, can you fill in here?

BCEL doesn't have a community and never has (even pre-Apache days). It came to
Apache ready made and of high enough quality that no one really needs to change it much. Theres a lot of users but thats about it.

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...

Rgds,
Neeme


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>