Re: [aspectj-users] AspectJ 1.6.7 - faster than ever.

[Andrew Eisenberg <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The plan is to not release a 2.0.2 for 3.4, but we expect to put out
dev builds for 3.4 on an as-needed/as-requested basis.  I will try to
get a 3.4 build out this week.

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Thomas Hofmann <email@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just noticed that there are no scheduled dev builds for the 3.4 stream. Does that mean you don't plan to continue the support for 3.4?
>
> That would be pretty sad and actually a problem for those who are using IDEs based on 3.4 like Rational Software Architect or Rational Application Developer as they are based on 3.4.
>
> I would be like to try out the performance improvements coming with AspectJ 1.6.7 in RSA. Is there any way you could build a dev build for 3.4 or is the code imcompatible now?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Hofmann
> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 8:38 AM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [aspectj-users] AspectJ 1.6.7 - faster than ever.
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I'm eager to see how this effects building the projects I am working on. Could you please announce here when a new AJDT build with AspectJ 1.6.7 will be available on the update site?
>
> Thanks, Thomas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Clement
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 11:12 PM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx; AspectJ developer discussions
> Subject: [aspectj-users] AspectJ 1.6.7 - faster than ever.
>
> I've been a bit quiet on the list lately, I've had my head down in
> AspectJ adding some timing infrastructure.  I've just put up a first
> blog article about what you can find in the latest AspectJ.  Basically
> the latest dev builds will produce profiling information for your
> pointcuts allowing you to see which pointcuts are hurting your compile
> times.  Information like this:
>
> Pointcut matching cost (total=6532ms for 675000 joinpoint match calls):
> Time:482ms (jps:#168585) matching against
>    (staticinitialization(*y*.()) && persingleton(SimpleAspect))
> Time:3970ms (jps:#168585) matching against
>    (execution(* *t*.*(*)) && persingleton(SimpleAspect))
> Time:538ms (jps:#168584) matching against
>    (execution(* *f*(..)) && persingleton(SimpleAspect))
> Time:1536ms (jps:#168584) matching against
>    (execution(* java.lang.CharSequence+.*e*(..)) && persingleton(SimpleAspect))
> Time:4ms (jps:#662) matching against
>    (within(*p*) && persingleton(SimpleAspect))
>
> Post is here:
> http://andrewclement.blogspot.com/2009/11/aspectj-profiling-pointcut-matching.html
>
> Please have a read and try it out.  Based on the results of it I've
> changed a few key algorithms internal to AspectJ.  What difference
> does it make? Well just to wet your appetite:
>
> Aspect:
> aspect SimpleAspect {
>  before(): execution(* CharSequence+.*e*(..)) {}
> }
>
> AspectJ1.6.6:
> ajc -timers SimpleAspect.aj -inpath rt.jar -outjar woven.jar
> Compiler took 19260ms
>
> AspectJ1.6.7 dev builds:
> ajc -timers SimpleAspect.aj -inpath rt.jar -outjar woven.jar
> Compiler took 12531ms
>
> I'll put out a second article about matching improvements shortly.  It
> will cover what is faster (and why it is faster) and how you can make
> sure you benefit from the speed up.
>
> cheers,
> Andy
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>