Set property svn:eol-style to native
diff --git a/org.jacoco.doc/docroot/doc/implementation.html b/org.jacoco.doc/docroot/doc/implementation.html
index 43b7b35..3db9a68 100644
--- a/org.jacoco.doc/docroot/doc/implementation.html
+++ b/org.jacoco.doc/docroot/doc/implementation.html
@@ -1,280 +1,280 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>

-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">

-<head>

-  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />

-  <link rel="stylesheet" href=".resources/doc.css" charset="ISO-8859-1" type="text/css" />

-  <link rel="stylesheet" href="../coverage/.resources/prettify.css" charset="ISO-8859-1" type="text/css" />

-  <link rel="shortcut icon" href=".resources/report.gif" type="image/gif" />

-  <script type="text/javascript" src="../coverage/.resources/prettify.js"></script>

-  <title>JaCoCo - Implementation Design</title>

-</head>

-<body onload="prettyPrint()">

-

-<div class="breadcrumb">

-  <a href="../index.html" class="el_report">JaCoCo</a> &gt;

-  <a href="index.html" class="el_group">Documentation</a> &gt;

-  <span class="el_source">Implementation Design</span>

-</div>

-<div id="content"> 

-

-<h1>Implementation Design</h1>

-

-<p>

-  This is a unordered list of implementation design decisions. Each topic tries

-  to follow this structure:

-</p>

-

-<ul>

-  <li>Problem statement</li>

-  <li>Proposed Solution</li>

-  <li>Alternatives and Discussion</li>

-</ul>

-

-

-<h2>Coverage Analysis Mechanism</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  Coverage information has to be collected at runtime. For this purpose JaCoCo

-  creates instrumented versions of the original class definitions. The

-  instrumentation process happens on-the-fly during class loading using so

-  called Java agents.  

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  There are several different approaches to collect coverage information. For

-  each approach different implementation techniques are known. The following

-  diagram gives an overview with the techniques used by JaCoCo highlighted:

-</p>

-

-<img src=".resources/implementation.png" alt="Coverage Implementation Techniques"/>

-

-<p>

-  Byte code instrumentation is very fast, can be implemented in pure Java and

-  works with every Java VM. On-the-fly instrumentation with the Java agent

-  hook can be added to the JVM without any modification of the target

-  application.

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  The Java agent hook requires at least 1.5 JVMs. Class files compiled with

-  debug information (line numbers) allow for source code highlighting. Unluckily

-  some Java language constructs get compiled to byte code that produces

-  unexpected highlighting results, especially in case of implicitly generated

-  code like default constructors or control structures for finally statements.

-</p>

-

-

-<h2>Coverage Agent Isolation</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  The Java agent is loaded by the application class loader. Therefore the

-  classes of the agent live in the same name space like the application classes

-  which can result in clashes especially with the third party library ASM. The

-  JoCoCo build therefore moves all agent classes into a unique package.  

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  The JaCoCo build renames all classes contained in the

-  <code>jacocoagent.jar</code> into classes with a 

-  <code>org.jacoco.agent.rt_&lt;randomid&gt;</code> prefix, including the

-  required ASM library classes. The identifier is created from a random number.

-  As the agent does not provide any API, no one should be affected by this

-  renaming. This trick also allows that JaCoCo tests can be verified with

-  JaCoCo.

-</p>

-

-

-<h2>Minimal Java Version</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  JaCoCo requires Java 1.5.

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  The Java agent mechanism used for on-the-fly instrumentation became available

-  with Java 1.5 VMs. Coding and testing with Java 1.5 language level is more

-  efficient, less error-prone &ndash; and more fun than with older versions.

-  JaCoCo will still allow to run against Java code compiled for these.

-</p>

-

-

-<h2>Byte Code Manipulation</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  Instrumentation requires mechanisms to modify and generate Java byte code.

-  JaCoCo uses the ASM library for this purpose internally.

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  Implementing the Java byte code specification would be an extensive and

-  error-prone task. Therefore an existing library should be used. The

-  <a href="http://asm.objectweb.org/">ASM</a> library is lightweight, easy to

-  use and very efficient in terms of memory and CPU usage. It is actively

-  maintained and includes as huge regression test suite. Its simplified BSD

-  license is approved by the Eclipse Foundation for usage with EPL products.

-</p>

-

-<h2>Java Class Identity</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  Each class loaded at runtime needs a unique identity to associate coverage data with.

-  JaCoCo creates such identities by a CRC64 hash code of the raw class definition.

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  In multi-classloader environments the plain name of a class does not

-  unambiguously identify a class. For example OSGi allows to use different

-  versions of the same class to be loaded within the same VM. In complex

-  deployment scenarios the actual version of the test target might be different

-  from current development version. A code coverage report should guarantee that

-  the presented figures are extracted from a valid test target. A hash code of

-  the class definitions allows to differentiate between classes and versions of

-  classes. The CRC64 hash computation is simple and fast resulting in a small 64

-  bit identifier. 

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  The same class definition might be loaded by class loaders which will result

-  in different classes for the Java runtime system. For coverage analysis this

-  distinction should be irrelevant. Class definitions might be altered by other

-  instrumentation based technologies (e.g. AspectJ). In this case the hash code

-  will change and identity gets lost. On the other hand code coverage analysis

-  based on classes that have been somehow altered will produce unexpected

-  results. The CRC64 code might produce so called <i>collisions</i>, i.e.

-  creating the same hash code for two different classes. Although CRC64 is not

-  cryptographically strong and collision examples can be easily computed, for

-  regular class files the collision probability is very low. 

-</p>

-

-<h2>Coverage Runtime Dependency</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  Instrumented code typically gets a dependency to a coverage runtime which is

-  responsible for collecting and storing execution data. JaCoCo uses JRE types

-  only in generated instrumentation code. 

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  Making a runtime library available to all instrumented classes can be a

-  painful or impossible task in frameworks that use their own class loading

-  mechanisms. Since Java 1.6 <code>java.lang.instrument.Instrumentation</code>

-  has an API to extends the bootsstrap loader. As our minimum target is Java 1.5 

-  JaCoCo decouples the instrumented classes and the coverage runtime through

-  official JRE API types only. The instrumented classes communicate through the

-  <code>Object.equals(Object)</code> method with the runtime. A instrumented

-  class can retrieve its probe array instance with the following code. Note

-  that only JRE APIs are used:   

-</p>

-

-

-<pre class="source lang-java linenums">

-Object access = ...                          // Retrieve instance

-

-Object[] args = new Object[3];

-args[0] = Long.valueOf(8060044182221863588); // class id 

-args[1] = "com/example/MyClass";             // class name

-args[2] = Integer.valueOf(24);               // probe count

-

-access.equals(args);

-

-boolean[] probes = (boolean[]) args[0];

-</pre>

-

-<p>

-  The most tricky part takes place in line 1 and is not shown in the snippet

-  above. The object instance providing access to the coverage runtime through

-  its <code>equals()</code> method has to be obtained. Different approaches have

-  been implemented and tested so far:

-</p>

-

-<ul>

-  <li><b><code>SystemPropertiesRuntime</code></b>: This approach stores the

-    object instance under a system property. This solution breaks the contract

-    that system properties must only contain <code>java.lang.String</code>

-    values and therefore causes trouble in applications that rely on this

-    definition (e.g. Ant).</li>

-  <li><b><code>LoggerRuntime</code></b>: Here we use a shared

-    <code>java.util.logging.Logger</code> and communicate through the logging

-    parameter array instead of a <code>equals()</code> method. The coverage

-    runtime registers a custom <code>Handler</code> to receive the parameter

-    array. This approach might break environments that install their own log

-    managers (e.g. Glassfish).</li> 

-  <li><b><code>URLStreamHandlerRuntime</code></b>: This runtime registers a

-    <code>URLStreamHandler</code> for a "jacoco-xxxxx" protocol. Instrumented

-    classes open a connection on this protocol. The returned connection object

-    is the one that provides access to the coverage runtime through its

-    <code>equals()</code> method. However to register the protocol the runtime

-    needs to access internal members of the <code>java.net.URL</code> class.</li> 

-  <li><b><code>ModifiedSystemClassRuntime</code></b>: This approach adds a

-    public static field to an existing JRE class through instrumentation. Unlike

-    the other methods above this is only possible for environments where a Java

-    agent is active.</li> 

-</ul>

-

-<p>

-  The current JaCoCo Java agent implementation uses the 

-  <code>ModifiedSystemClassRuntime</code> adding a field to the class

-  <code>java.sql.Types</code>.

-</p>

-

-

-<h2>Memory Usage</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  Coverage analysis for huge projects with several thousand classes or hundred

-  thousand lines of code should be possible. To allow this with reasonable

-  memory usage the coverage analysis is based on streaming patterns and

-  "depth first" traversals.  

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  The complete data tree of a huge coverage report is too big to fit into a

-  reasonable heap memory configuration. Therefore the coverage analysis and

-  report generation is implemented as "depth first" traversals. Which means that

-  at any point in time only the following data has to be held in working memory:  

-</p>

-

-<ul>

-  <li>A single class which is currently processed.</li>

-  <li>The summary information of all parents of this class (package, groups).</li>

-</ul>

-

-<h2>Java Element Identifiers</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  The Java language and the Java VM use different String representation formats

-  for Java elements. For example while a type reference in Java reads like 

-  <code>java.lang.Object</code>, the VM references the same type as

-  <code>Ljava/lang/Object;</code>. The JaCoCo API is based on VM identifiers only.

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  Using VM identifiers directly does not cause any transformation overhead at

-  runtime. There are several programming languages based on the Java VM that

-  might use different notations. Specific transformations should therefore only

-  happen at the user interface level, for example during report generation.

-</p>

-

-<h2>Modularization of the JaCoCo implementation</h2>

-

-<p class="intro">

-  JaCoCo is implemented in several modules providing different functionality.

-  These modules are provided as OSGi bundles with proper manifest files. But

-  there are no dependencies on OSGi itself.

-</p>

-

-<p>

-  Using OSGi bundles allows well defined dependencies at development time and

-  at runtime in OSGi containers. As there are no dependencies on OSGi, the

-  bundles can also be used like regular JAR files.  

-</p>

-

-</div>

-<div class="footer">

-  <span class="right"><a href="@jacoco.home.url@">JaCoCo</a> @qualified.bundle.version@</span>

-  <a href="license.html">Copyright</a> &copy; @copyright.years@ Mountainminds GmbH &amp; Co. KG and Contributors

-</div>

-

-</body>

-</html>
\ No newline at end of file
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">
+<head>
+  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
+  <link rel="stylesheet" href=".resources/doc.css" charset="ISO-8859-1" type="text/css" />
+  <link rel="stylesheet" href="../coverage/.resources/prettify.css" charset="ISO-8859-1" type="text/css" />
+  <link rel="shortcut icon" href=".resources/report.gif" type="image/gif" />
+  <script type="text/javascript" src="../coverage/.resources/prettify.js"></script>
+  <title>JaCoCo - Implementation Design</title>
+</head>
+<body onload="prettyPrint()">
+
+<div class="breadcrumb">
+  <a href="../index.html" class="el_report">JaCoCo</a> &gt;
+  <a href="index.html" class="el_group">Documentation</a> &gt;
+  <span class="el_source">Implementation Design</span>
+</div>
+<div id="content"> 
+
+<h1>Implementation Design</h1>
+
+<p>
+  This is a unordered list of implementation design decisions. Each topic tries
+  to follow this structure:
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>Problem statement</li>
+  <li>Proposed Solution</li>
+  <li>Alternatives and Discussion</li>
+</ul>
+
+
+<h2>Coverage Analysis Mechanism</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  Coverage information has to be collected at runtime. For this purpose JaCoCo
+  creates instrumented versions of the original class definitions. The
+  instrumentation process happens on-the-fly during class loading using so
+  called Java agents.  
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  There are several different approaches to collect coverage information. For
+  each approach different implementation techniques are known. The following
+  diagram gives an overview with the techniques used by JaCoCo highlighted:
+</p>
+
+<img src=".resources/implementation.png" alt="Coverage Implementation Techniques"/>
+
+<p>
+  Byte code instrumentation is very fast, can be implemented in pure Java and
+  works with every Java VM. On-the-fly instrumentation with the Java agent
+  hook can be added to the JVM without any modification of the target
+  application.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  The Java agent hook requires at least 1.5 JVMs. Class files compiled with
+  debug information (line numbers) allow for source code highlighting. Unluckily
+  some Java language constructs get compiled to byte code that produces
+  unexpected highlighting results, especially in case of implicitly generated
+  code like default constructors or control structures for finally statements.
+</p>
+
+
+<h2>Coverage Agent Isolation</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  The Java agent is loaded by the application class loader. Therefore the
+  classes of the agent live in the same name space like the application classes
+  which can result in clashes especially with the third party library ASM. The
+  JoCoCo build therefore moves all agent classes into a unique package.  
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  The JaCoCo build renames all classes contained in the
+  <code>jacocoagent.jar</code> into classes with a 
+  <code>org.jacoco.agent.rt_&lt;randomid&gt;</code> prefix, including the
+  required ASM library classes. The identifier is created from a random number.
+  As the agent does not provide any API, no one should be affected by this
+  renaming. This trick also allows that JaCoCo tests can be verified with
+  JaCoCo.
+</p>
+
+
+<h2>Minimal Java Version</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  JaCoCo requires Java 1.5.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  The Java agent mechanism used for on-the-fly instrumentation became available
+  with Java 1.5 VMs. Coding and testing with Java 1.5 language level is more
+  efficient, less error-prone &ndash; and more fun than with older versions.
+  JaCoCo will still allow to run against Java code compiled for these.
+</p>
+
+
+<h2>Byte Code Manipulation</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  Instrumentation requires mechanisms to modify and generate Java byte code.
+  JaCoCo uses the ASM library for this purpose internally.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  Implementing the Java byte code specification would be an extensive and
+  error-prone task. Therefore an existing library should be used. The
+  <a href="http://asm.objectweb.org/">ASM</a> library is lightweight, easy to
+  use and very efficient in terms of memory and CPU usage. It is actively
+  maintained and includes as huge regression test suite. Its simplified BSD
+  license is approved by the Eclipse Foundation for usage with EPL products.
+</p>
+
+<h2>Java Class Identity</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  Each class loaded at runtime needs a unique identity to associate coverage data with.
+  JaCoCo creates such identities by a CRC64 hash code of the raw class definition.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  In multi-classloader environments the plain name of a class does not
+  unambiguously identify a class. For example OSGi allows to use different
+  versions of the same class to be loaded within the same VM. In complex
+  deployment scenarios the actual version of the test target might be different
+  from current development version. A code coverage report should guarantee that
+  the presented figures are extracted from a valid test target. A hash code of
+  the class definitions allows to differentiate between classes and versions of
+  classes. The CRC64 hash computation is simple and fast resulting in a small 64
+  bit identifier. 
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  The same class definition might be loaded by class loaders which will result
+  in different classes for the Java runtime system. For coverage analysis this
+  distinction should be irrelevant. Class definitions might be altered by other
+  instrumentation based technologies (e.g. AspectJ). In this case the hash code
+  will change and identity gets lost. On the other hand code coverage analysis
+  based on classes that have been somehow altered will produce unexpected
+  results. The CRC64 code might produce so called <i>collisions</i>, i.e.
+  creating the same hash code for two different classes. Although CRC64 is not
+  cryptographically strong and collision examples can be easily computed, for
+  regular class files the collision probability is very low. 
+</p>
+
+<h2>Coverage Runtime Dependency</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  Instrumented code typically gets a dependency to a coverage runtime which is
+  responsible for collecting and storing execution data. JaCoCo uses JRE types
+  only in generated instrumentation code. 
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  Making a runtime library available to all instrumented classes can be a
+  painful or impossible task in frameworks that use their own class loading
+  mechanisms. Since Java 1.6 <code>java.lang.instrument.Instrumentation</code>
+  has an API to extends the bootsstrap loader. As our minimum target is Java 1.5 
+  JaCoCo decouples the instrumented classes and the coverage runtime through
+  official JRE API types only. The instrumented classes communicate through the
+  <code>Object.equals(Object)</code> method with the runtime. A instrumented
+  class can retrieve its probe array instance with the following code. Note
+  that only JRE APIs are used:   
+</p>
+
+
+<pre class="source lang-java linenums">
+Object access = ...                          // Retrieve instance
+
+Object[] args = new Object[3];
+args[0] = Long.valueOf(8060044182221863588); // class id 
+args[1] = "com/example/MyClass";             // class name
+args[2] = Integer.valueOf(24);               // probe count
+
+access.equals(args);
+
+boolean[] probes = (boolean[]) args[0];
+</pre>
+
+<p>
+  The most tricky part takes place in line 1 and is not shown in the snippet
+  above. The object instance providing access to the coverage runtime through
+  its <code>equals()</code> method has to be obtained. Different approaches have
+  been implemented and tested so far:
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li><b><code>SystemPropertiesRuntime</code></b>: This approach stores the
+    object instance under a system property. This solution breaks the contract
+    that system properties must only contain <code>java.lang.String</code>
+    values and therefore causes trouble in applications that rely on this
+    definition (e.g. Ant).</li>
+  <li><b><code>LoggerRuntime</code></b>: Here we use a shared
+    <code>java.util.logging.Logger</code> and communicate through the logging
+    parameter array instead of a <code>equals()</code> method. The coverage
+    runtime registers a custom <code>Handler</code> to receive the parameter
+    array. This approach might break environments that install their own log
+    managers (e.g. Glassfish).</li> 
+  <li><b><code>URLStreamHandlerRuntime</code></b>: This runtime registers a
+    <code>URLStreamHandler</code> for a "jacoco-xxxxx" protocol. Instrumented
+    classes open a connection on this protocol. The returned connection object
+    is the one that provides access to the coverage runtime through its
+    <code>equals()</code> method. However to register the protocol the runtime
+    needs to access internal members of the <code>java.net.URL</code> class.</li> 
+  <li><b><code>ModifiedSystemClassRuntime</code></b>: This approach adds a
+    public static field to an existing JRE class through instrumentation. Unlike
+    the other methods above this is only possible for environments where a Java
+    agent is active.</li> 
+</ul>
+
+<p>
+  The current JaCoCo Java agent implementation uses the 
+  <code>ModifiedSystemClassRuntime</code> adding a field to the class
+  <code>java.sql.Types</code>.
+</p>
+
+
+<h2>Memory Usage</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  Coverage analysis for huge projects with several thousand classes or hundred
+  thousand lines of code should be possible. To allow this with reasonable
+  memory usage the coverage analysis is based on streaming patterns and
+  "depth first" traversals.  
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  The complete data tree of a huge coverage report is too big to fit into a
+  reasonable heap memory configuration. Therefore the coverage analysis and
+  report generation is implemented as "depth first" traversals. Which means that
+  at any point in time only the following data has to be held in working memory:  
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+  <li>A single class which is currently processed.</li>
+  <li>The summary information of all parents of this class (package, groups).</li>
+</ul>
+
+<h2>Java Element Identifiers</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  The Java language and the Java VM use different String representation formats
+  for Java elements. For example while a type reference in Java reads like 
+  <code>java.lang.Object</code>, the VM references the same type as
+  <code>Ljava/lang/Object;</code>. The JaCoCo API is based on VM identifiers only.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  Using VM identifiers directly does not cause any transformation overhead at
+  runtime. There are several programming languages based on the Java VM that
+  might use different notations. Specific transformations should therefore only
+  happen at the user interface level, for example during report generation.
+</p>
+
+<h2>Modularization of the JaCoCo implementation</h2>
+
+<p class="intro">
+  JaCoCo is implemented in several modules providing different functionality.
+  These modules are provided as OSGi bundles with proper manifest files. But
+  there are no dependencies on OSGi itself.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+  Using OSGi bundles allows well defined dependencies at development time and
+  at runtime in OSGi containers. As there are no dependencies on OSGi, the
+  bundles can also be used like regular JAR files.  
+</p>
+
+</div>
+<div class="footer">
+  <span class="right"><a href="@jacoco.home.url@">JaCoCo</a> @qualified.bundle.version@</span>
+  <a href="license.html">Copyright</a> &copy; @copyright.years@ Mountainminds GmbH &amp; Co. KG and Contributors
+</div>
+
+</body>
+</html>