[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-8385?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17413393#comment-17413393
 ] 

mgroovy commented on GROOVY-8385:
---------------------------------

Hi Eric, I'll be honest, I did not expect any progress to be made on this. 
Problem is: We (my son and I) have not touched the Minecraft project since a 
few months after this ticket was created (in part due to too little time, in 
part due to the ongoing struggle with getting Groovy to play nice with the MC 
obfuscator), and , so it is way out of sync with the current Java Minecraft 
version afaik. I will try to give feedback, but I can really make no promises...

> CompileStatic: Improved method call/property access Java compatibility for 
> Minecraft Forge obfuscation support
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: GROOVY-8385
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-8385
>             Project: Groovy
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: bytecode
>            Reporter: mgroovy
>            Assignee: Jochen Theodorou
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: Forge, Java, JavaCompatibility, Minecraft, Modding
>
> * Even with @CompileStatic the Groovy compiler creates bytecode for method 
> calls / property access which is dynamic in nature. 
> * This means that e.g. Minecraft Forge's obfuscator does not pick up the 
> calls in the generated bytecode, which means they do not get obfuscated, 
> which in turn makes the code fail when executed in Minecraft.
> * This effectively makes it nearly impossible to write Minecraft mods with 
> Groovy, which in turn is a wasted opportunity to get people involved with 
> Groovy early on.
> * Possible approaches to improve the situation:
> ## Improve on a fundamental level: According to [~paulk] only a few calls are 
> required to be done dynamically for Groovy functionality to work as expected 
> under @CompileStatic. 
> *** The problem seems to be that it could be hard to be a 100% sure no edge 
> case is overlooked, as to not break @CompileStatic in situations where e.g. 
> no 100% Java-call-compatibility is needed.
> ## Improve through newly introduced @CompileStatic parameters
> *** => Static method call / property access bytecode is generated for method 
> code / all class methods repectively (with possible exceptions for the know 
> cases mentioned above).
> ## Improve through newly introduced @ObfuscationJavaCompatibility annotation 
> that can be put on a method or class
> *** behavior same as for @CompileStatic parameters above



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to