Cool.
When / where is the next meeting?
Regards,
Randy
On Feb 9, 2004, at 1:40 PM, Simon Ritchie wrote:
Sorry about the late notice.
For this month's meeting, Nick Lesiecki will be doing a presentation
on Testing with Virtual Mock Objects (it involves AspectJ).
Any volunteers for a 15 min
i would like to do a 15 min presentation on Java Bytecode Inspection,
Manipulation, and Generation Using BCEL.
Simon Ritchie wrote:
[...]
Any volunteers for a 15 min presentation would be welcome.
Simon.
--
I say to you that the VCR is to the American film
producer and the American public as
+1!
-warner
On Feb 9, 2004, at 2:19 PM, Andrew Huntwork wrote:
i would like to do a 15 min presentation on Java Bytecode Inspection,
Manipulation, and Generation Using BCEL.
Simon Ritchie wrote:
[...]
Any volunteers for a 15 min presentation would be welcome.
Simon.
--
I say to you that the
Hi,
I could do a 5-10 minute ad-hoc spiel (no slides or computer!) on my experiences
with using Bytecode Manipulation in conjunction with Aspect-Oriented Programming
frameworks, and some pitfalls I encountered.
This would be based on my experience with my VirtualMock project, which is based
Wow, two volunteers within 10 minutes.
Ok, this sounds pretty good. What sequence is going to work best? I'm
guessing:
1. Andrew - BCEL (15min)
2. Chad - Bytecode manipulation as related to Aspect (5-10min)
3. Nick - Mock Objects using Aspect (1hr)
Simon.
Chad Woolley wrote:
Hi,
I could do a
i have no problem with that sequence
Simon Ritchie wrote:
Wow, two volunteers within 10 minutes.
Ok, this sounds pretty good. What sequence is going to work best? I'm
guessing:
1. Andrew - BCEL (15min)
2. Chad - Bytecode manipulation as related to Aspect (5-10min)
3. Nick - Mock Objects using
What sequence is going to work best? I'm guessing:
My vote would be for the reverse order. Gives Nick plenty of time plus a
chance to get us familiar with some of the concepts that might be
revisited by Chad/Andrew.
3. Nick - Mock Objects using Aspect (1hr)
2. Chad - Bytecode manipulation as
I would tend to agree - both with the order, and letting Nick have the final say :).
I think I would build on some of Nick's topics, and Andrew might shed some light
on the issues I bring up.
-- Chad
Tim Colson wrote:
What sequence is going to work best? I'm guessing:
My vote would be for
