Hi Jochen,
Both ASM lib and Class-File API are good, I would like to have an abstract
layer for them. The API for the abstract layer could be align with ASM lib as
Groovy relies on ASM lib heavily.
If Groovy finds Class-File API is avaible, use Class-File API as the
implementation for an abstract layer, otherwise use ASM lib.
Cheers,
Daniel Sun
On 2024/01/18 17:19:07 Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> currently the Classfile API (https://openjdk.org/jeps/457) is getting
> more and more usage in the newest version of the jdk. Even though the
> target is not to replace the ASM lib, that is actually happening for the
> JDK. As for the motivation of why they move from ASM to the ClassFile
> API (taken from JEP-457):
> """
> Because the class-file format can evolve every six months, frameworks
> are more frequently encountering class files that are newer than the
> class-file library that they bundle. This version skew results in errors
> visible to application developers or, worse, in framework developers
> trying to write code to parse class files from the future and engaging
> in leaps of faith that nothing too serious will change. Framework
> developers need a class-file library that they can trust is up-to-date
> with the running JDK.
> """
>
> Well... in Groovy we have a bit the same problem. I'd like to encourage
> a discussion about this here... staying with ASM, moving to ClassFile or
> use both?
>
> What do you guys think about?
>
> bye Jochen
>
