http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1359802/diff/4/5 File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/BytecodeSignatureMaker.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1359802/diff/4/5#newcode76 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/BytecodeSignatureMaker.java:76: // ignore I think generators do care about annotations that might exist in a class (e.g. in ClientBundle, @Source()). http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1359802/diff/4/5#newcode161 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/BytecodeSignatureMaker.java:161: ~(Opcodes.ACC_ANNOTATION | Opcodes.ACC_DEPRECATED Yes, agreed, the ClientBundle generator, for instance, definitely depends on knowing if there's been a change in an annotation, e.g. @Source("sourceName") http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1359802/diff/4/5#newcode173 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/BytecodeSignatureMaker.java:173: Is there a reason why you need to create multiple StringBuilders, for the header, fields and methods? Could you just maintain one big signatureBuilder, which might be less overhead? I see you do sorting here, but doesn't the ASM get visited in a repeatable order anyway, as it is? I think it's probably ok if the order of some methods get swapped in a source file, if that results in a different signature, no? http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1359802/show -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
