2008/11/6 Chris Nokleberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > FYI the JarJar authors == me, so it may not solve your single > developer issue :-) > > The main reason that JarJar only does class-based elimination is that > it is 100x simpler. Basically it was trivial to add as a feature to > the existing jarjar codebase so I did it, but I'm less enthused about > making it a proguard alternative. I think using a combination of > proguard + jarjar is totally reasonable and in fact I have done that > myself on past projects. >
FYI, I finally got round to writing patch that removes "unused" static methods: http://code.google.com/p/jarjar/issues/detail?id=22 I've tested it with Guice, but not checked impact on performance/memory use -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
