[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [aspectj-dev] BCEL vs ASM
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
[quote Kev Jackson::on 1/25/2005 11:46 AM]
| I'm new here, so I'm probably asking a stupid question, but...
|
| Would it be possible to replace BCEL with ASM[1]? Does it provide the
| same level of manipulation that BCEL does, and if so what's the reason
| for not using it?
|
| Pros for switching to ASM:
| - smaller jar, so smaller distribution of AspectJ
| - allegedly much faster
| - allegedly more memory efficient
|
| Cons
| - license issue?
| - compatibility issues
|
| Any thoughts?
|
| Kev
| _______________________________________________
| aspectj-dev mailing list
| aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
| http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-dev
|
The programming model with ASM is quite different (visitor based) than the one used by BCEL (much
easier, more neat to the programmer). As a paranthesis AW is using ASM for bytecode manipulation.
Probably there is no drawback for using ASM, but the effort of changing the whole weaver to use ASM
is considerable.
- --
:pope
[the_mindstorm]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFB9htxTTDTje0R2dgRAtPTAJoDSWMhgyFwSNEmypTckSHAC9Hf5QCdE+OY
aZiVWIOOA8Do5/JFmNgeHbM=
=jLFy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
