Hi Stefan, Feel free to provide a PR on GitHub ;-) That is the best way to nudge the component in the direction you need.
Gary On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 18:36 Stefan Reich <[email protected]> wrote: > OK I think I figured it out. There is setSignature in > org.apache.bcel.generic.Type which I need to call with my generic field > signature (since direct representations of generic types are actually not > built into BCEL yet). > > Not a problem, what's unfortunate is just that setSignature is > package-protected so I'd have to patch BCEL to call it. > > The field signature itself is protected so I could set it directly in a > subclass of ObjectType. > > However, there is a note that say this practice will be made impossible in > the future. So, in conclusion, I am proposing to change that note (in > org/apache/bcel/generic/Type.java): > > /** > * @deprecated (since 6.0) will be made private; do not access > directly, use getter/setter > */ > @Deprecated > protected String signature; // signature for the type TODO should be > private > > > and/or making the setSignature method in the same class public. > > Greetings, > Stefan > > > > On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 at 17:42, Stefan Reich < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, the title basically says it... I'm trying to create a field with a > > parameterized type (e.g. List<String>), but I can't find a subclass of > Type > > representing a parameterized type that I could pass to the FieldGen > > constructor. > > > > Thanks, > > Stefan > > > > -- > > == Gaz.AI == > > > > > -- > == Gaz.AI == >
