On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 17:45:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz <psan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I see what you mean. `transforming` was selected to represent the >> continuation of the code building process, similar to `trying` and >> `catching`. While `transform` may imply that the actual code builder gets >> transformed into something else. For example `MethodModel::transformCode` >> takes `CodeModel`, applies `CodeTransform` and after that the code of the >> actual method is finished. >> What about `transformBlock(BlockCodeBuilder, CodeTransform)`? > > I am unsure how you might use `BlockCodeBuilder`. If the current signature is > not changed then `transformFromHandler` seems reasonable (since its the > handler that pushes elements into its given builder). > > The other `transform` is implicitly "transform model". I'm sorry my answer was inaccurate, what I'm proposing is `transformBlock(Consumer<BlockCodeBuilder>, CodeTransform)` or `transformedBlock(Consumer<BlockCodeBuilder>, CodeTransform)`. `BlockCodeBuilder` is just an extension of `CodeBuilder` with ability to break block execution. Block is a sub-unit of code, so I expect it would be a logical extension of the actual `block(Consumer<BlockCodeBuilder>`. I'll move this discussion to the mailing list to make common decision about API change. Thanks. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10982
