On 19/11/2012 11:15, Staffan Larsen wrote:
:
I think you are right that bytecode instrumentation would also work. The only
problem I see (apart from the path field) is the time it would take to develop
such a solution. I'm not sure if that is a good enough argument for keeping the
non-bytecode-instrumentation solution, though. Or if we could replace the
non-bytecode-instrumentation solution with an updated bytecode instrumentation
solution in a later update? Not ideal, but would allow us to complete the
project on time.
I'd go along with that, assuming of course that the changes to use
bytecode instrumentation aren't pushed out indefinitely.
-Alan
