Chris Nokleberg wrote:
Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
2. Performance - This is interesting. CGLIB has a disadvantage here
due to the number of parameters passed to the intercept method. It
turns out, all of the overhead is because of these parameters that
cannot be overcome (atleast AFAIK). With
Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
>> 2. Performance - This is interesting. CGLIB has a disadvantage here
>> due to the number of parameters passed to the intercept method. It
>> turns out, all of the overhead is because of these parameters that
>> cannot be overcome (atleast AFAIK). With a single counter
Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
Howard - if I remember right - last time on interceptor
ordering you said
something about bundles of interceptors. It did not realy
understand that.
The issue is that if you contribute multiple interceptors to a service extension
point, you have to
be concern
> Howard - if I remember right - last time on interceptor
> ordering you said
> something about bundles of interceptors. It did not realy
> understand that.
The issue is that if you contribute multiple interceptors to a service extension
point, you have to
be concerned with order. This is an o
ish Krishnaswamy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:45 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [HiveMind] Interceptors - CGLIB / Javassist comparison
Seems that's what you said before ;) But nevermind this is a
more-than-enough-pointer!
-Harish
Christian Essl wro
p.com
-Original Message-
From: Harish Krishnaswamy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:45 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [HiveMind] Interceptors - CGLIB / Javassist comparison
Seems that's what you said before ;) But nevermind this is a
more-t
ED]
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:45 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [HiveMind] Interceptors - CGLIB / Javassist comparison
>
>
> Seems that's what you said before ;) But nevermind this is a
> more-than-enough-pointer!
>
> -Harish
>
Seems that's what you said before ;) But nevermind this is a
more-than-enough-pointer!
-Harish
Christian Essl wrote:
Sorry I made a mistake I meant ProxyFactory.extend() not create().
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 13:37:06 -0500, Harish Krishnaswamy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Absolutely! Thanks for th
Sorry I made a mistake I meant ProxyFactory.extend() not create().
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 13:37:06 -0500, Harish Krishnaswamy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Absolutely! Thanks for the tips. So that's what I'll do.
-Harish
Christian Essl wrote:
Hi Harish,
I agree with you that HiveMind should provid
Absolutely! Thanks for the tips. So that's what I'll do.
-Harish
Christian Essl wrote:
Hi Harish,
I agree with you that HiveMind should provide a simpler (second) form
to write interceptors.
But before you waste your weekend looking at my code I have to tell
you that I did not use CGLIB but
Hi Harish,
I agree with you that HiveMind should provide a simpler (second) form to
write interceptors.
But before you waste your weekend looking at my code I have to tell you
that I did not use CGLIB but rather used Javassist to call
MethodInterceptors. And this was a mistake CGLIB is certain
Oops, sent to the wrong list!
Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
Hi,
I decided to do some work on interceptors and wanted to find a
suitable solution and so tried out CGLIB and Javassist and here are my
initial findings.
1. Ease-of-use / clarity / maintainability - Obviously here, anybody
that has d
12 matches
Mail list logo
