Le 04/12/2012 23:54, Matt Benson a écrit : > Well, it looks like the most comfortable avenue for everyone is Commons > [weaver]. IMO [weaver] would look like a framework for implementing any > kind of code weaving, so the most important decision is the look of the > API, and it would seem that eating our own dog food would be appropriate in > Commons. Thus I would propose that [weaver] be built on top of [BCEL], and > I would think it likely that we might provide a nice (fluent?) API for > common code modifications.
Let's start with a modest goal, we certainly don't want to reimplement AspectJ. The public API should only consists in the annotations. The weaving engine is our little internal mess. > Firstly, does anyone object to using [BCEL] as [weaver]'s foundation?; > secondly, can anyone tell me what (Java 7?) features [BCEL] currently > lacks?; thirdly, does any of us already have the expertise to add these? If you are willing to spend some time on this why not, but I really don't think it's important. I would just keep what's already done. As a Ant user my only criteria would be to have small dependencies, such that the size of the jar providing the weaving task isn't too big. I generally don't like putting a 1 MB jar to my project. Emmanuel Bourg
smime.p7s
Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME
