+1 On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:40 PM Jesse Glick <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <[email protected]> wrote: > > …this is relatively easily achievable by moving the transformed code > into a > > separate method so that bytecode index remain the same. > > I am not going to sleep more soundly tonight. :-) > > I think the broader issue is that use of runtime bytecode manipulation > has proven to be subject to catastrophic bugs which are tricky to > understand, much less fix. And pity the developer who attaches a Java > debugger with a `*-sources.jar` and tries to step through rewritten > code. We should be considering simpler, lower-tech options. If a field > has been replaced with a getter, or whatever, let us make sure we fix > the deprecated source code references and release those fixes and make > sure users are not running the wrong version. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr1jDBcFNEAwXz2ja5YoMhYbC_JUAcDKnzY40g9pWQEXTw%40mail.gmail.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPiUgVcT7gaiJwRXB2DsKSiG4%3D%3DMn4ChNWAVCGZkUTxxuDiGyw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
