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