Henry,
I do believe that at present moment there is absolutely no point to use BCEL for any new project. ASM can completely cover anything you would need for bytecode manipulation and will give better performance.
regards, Eugene
Henri Yandell wrote:
On 5/3/05, Eugene Kuleshov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Henri,
I'm not sure what else you need from ASM's DOM. It is sufficient enough for the purpose. It may not provide a complete type/opcode safety, but it is more lightweight from a memory point of view.
The SAX/DOM metaphor had been at the heart of a thread discussing whether BCEL had technical reasons to be used rather than ASM. After Eric's email in which he points out that both libraries can do DOM and SAX style APIs, but that the difference is which one is on top, I'm wondering what reasons the ASM guys would give to use BCEL instead of ASM, or whether ASM felt they would be a complete replacement for BCEL's feature-set sometime in the future.
Ideally I'd result in a "When to use ASM, when to use BCEL and when to use SERP" style of document. Would be nice for the BCEL site I think.
Hen
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]