cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <>
Subject Re: [RT] what about cocoon on a diet?
Date Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:16:12 GMT
Torsten Curdt wrote:

>And in theory ProGuard should do that just fine
>...but I fear the point is that ProGuard cannot
>really find the stuff that you don't want or need
>unless we split the core further down into smaller
>So you suggest to further modularize the core?

Modularizing is just a matter of reorganizing Jars, which proguards 
doesn't care about :-)

To use a shrinker efficiently, you have to tell him all class names that 
are loaded dynamically (can be automated by analyzing cocoon.xconf and 
the sitemap) and the entry points of your application (i.e. 

The shrinker then crawls the call graph and removes everything that's 
not in that graph: classes, but also methods and attributes. Proguard 
can also optionally do some nastier tricks by changing attributes 
visibility to public and inline getter/setter call to further reduce the 
code size.


Sylvain Wallez                        Anyware Technologies  
Apache Software Foundation Member     Research & Technology Director

View raw message