On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:58:33 GMT, Rémi Forax <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks all for the reviews. >> >> For static import, I'm OK with either way. It has the benefit of smaller >> bytecode, but a bit less readable for users without an IDE to navigate the >> source. >> >> I can go either way if someone has a strong preference. > > I think you mean smaller Java code, not smaller bytecode, the bytecode > generated by javac is identical if you use an import static or not. I mean bytecode. With the static import, the `Class.getReflectionFactory()` method is entirely removed, resulting a 47-byte reduction of `Class.class`: Size of `jdk/modules/java.base/java/lang/Class.class`: - With import static and method removal: 52936 - Without: 52983 ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31591#discussion_r3454815857
