Why doesn't jarjar strip out unused static methods? I believe
Proguard does.
Gili
Stuart McCulloch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think I've tracked down why jarjar isn't shrinking the collections
> library by much,
> it's related to the static methods that simplify the creation of
> generic collections.
>
> For example, from the injector implementation:
>
> multimap = Multimaps.newArrayListMultimap();
>
> Unfortunately, Multimaps (and similar classes like Maps, Sets, etc.)
> have a lot
> of static methods that touch classes throughout the collection - so
> once you've
> pulled in Multimaps you end up pulling in almost the complete library.
>
> In fact, even a simple class like:
>
> public class main {
> com.google.common.collect.Multimaps m;
> }
>
> will end up as a 431k jarfile when jarjar'd with Google Collections!
>
> Not sure how this could be resolved - technically you do need these
> classes as
> they're referenced from the same classfile (although not all the
> static methods
> will be called).
>
> The only solution would be to change back to creating generic
> collections using
> "new XYZ<...>" instead of the static approach "Foo.newXYZ()" as then
> jarjar can
> safely remove the unused classes, but this would affect readability...
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> --
> Cheers, Stuart
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"google-guice" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
