RE: [JBoss-dev] cglib vs javassit for proxies

[Jason T. Greene]

I should clarify, for WS, we just need plain javabean generation. So I can add that to our list of things to do. BTW I was too harsh, there are nice things about cglib. I just ran into a lot of bugs.   -Jason   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason T. Greene Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 7:56 PM To: jboss-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] cglib vs javassit for proxies   I am all for this, cglib sucks…   -Jason   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 1:47 PM To: jboss-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [JBoss-dev] cglib vs javassit for proxies   So I have to introduce a proxy for a javax.net.SSLServerSocket which is an abstract class and so have to use cglib or javassist. I see some proxy working in the head javassist, but this is not in the 4.0 branch version. We also don’t bundle javassist with 4.0 currently. I assume we would rather have javassist be the only bytecode manipulation framework in jboss. Is there a timeframe for completing the javassist proxy so we can think about moving hibernate, webservices, cmp2.x, etc over to it?