My two cents: table this as an interesting exercise. There may be some merit
in an immutable list factory, but the payoff for record types is not that much.
If you want to try some smaller optimizations in the bytecode generation then
you'll start to get some perspective on how easy/hard it ca
An API like this works fine for straightline code. But if you need to add
instructions conditionally, repeat blocks for additional instances, or other
complex scenarios; builders can quickly break down. I would wait to see how
the class file api shakes out before turning over nearly all of cla
On 22.01.24 01:23, Daniel Sun wrote:
Hi Jochen,
Groovy relies on ASM lib directly, so it would save lots of work if we
could have an abstract layer whose API aligns with ASM lib, just change ASM
package name(org.objectweb.asm) with Groovy package name, e.g.
org.apache.groovy.classfile.
On 22.01.24 20:15, Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev wrote:
The new Class File API is for reading not writing, correct?
I had a different impression. Sure, reading is a big use case for normal
Javausers, but they are currently moving their bytecode generation as
well. For example for proxies
