Insert code from Method into new class - java

I'm trying to make a library on top of bytebuddy that can be used to perform runtime transformations on a class. The API that I'm making isn't directly operable with ByteBuddy to insert method code into transformed classes, (I want unannotated methods to be added brand new to the transformed class, and methods annotated with #Inject to be injected into the head or tail of an existing method), My solution to the lack of interoperability was to create a temporary class using ByteBuddy, that transforms between my higher level API, and the Advice API from ByteBuddy. But I can't figure out how I could insert all the code from a method in the higher level API into methods defined in the lower level one, since I can't actually use Advice to do it. Is there a way I could do this?
This is the code that I've come up with to this point
fun apply(vararg transformerClasses: Class<*>) {
for(clazz in transformerClasses) {
val builder = ByteBuddy()
.subclass(clazz)
val mixinAnnotation = clazz.getAnnotation(Mixin::class.java) as? Mixin ?: throw RuntimeException("Passed transformer class without #Mixin annotation")
val mixinTarget = mixinAnnotation.target.java
for(method in clazz.declaredMethods) {
if(method.annotations.isEmpty()) {
builder.defineMethod(method.name, method.returnType, Visibility.PUBLIC, Ownership.STATIC)
.intercept(???)
}
}
}
}

There is not really a good way to do so but one solution would be to creste a TypeDescription instance where you translate your custom annotations to those of Byte Buddy.
You could use an implementation of InstrumentedType for creating such an object.
Byte Buddy still reads the byte code from the correct class file if the class name matches. There is no consistency check between the class file and the type description.

Related

How scala implicit make abstract method valid parameter so I can use method in java

So this is a bit of a strange question, but I am trying to make use of a piece of code that is in scala and takes a set of parameters. In scala the parameters are implicits so scala is able to do its magic to fill in what those objects need. But since I can't make an abstract object be "implicit" in java, I need to figure out how to create the object, but can't for the life of me.
Here is the scala code:
class AsyncSchemaRegistryClient (
val baseUri: String
) (
implicit as: ActorSystem,
m: Materializer,
ec: ExecutionContext
) extends SchemaRegistryClient[Future] with Json4sSupport {...
So this is called by another method in original code (in a long twisty path of Guice Inject and sub modules that is hard enough to follow as is), and I am trying to call it in the java code like this:
private AsyncSchemaRegistryClient asyncSchemaRegistryClient = new AsyncSchemaRegistryClient("test", ActorSystem.create(), Materializer(), new ExecutionContext);
Now the ActorSystem.create() seems to be valid (at least the compiler isn't yelling about it), but the Materializer and the ExecutionContext I cannot initialize because the are abstract. Also it is worth saying that the Materializer is akka.stream.Materializer and ExecutionContext is scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext.
The reason I am trying to make use of this AsyncSchemaRegistryClient is that it has a lot of code already set up for properly calling a schema registry and handling if it comes back with valid schema data or not and seems to be the easiest way to implement async checks on schema in my program.
Thanks in advance for any and all advice!
Try
ActorSystem system = ActorSystem.create();
ExecutionContextExecutor ec = system.dispatcher();
ActorMaterializer mat = ActorMaterializer.create(system);
new AsyncSchemaRegistryClient("test", system, mat, ec);

How to append a method to existing class using annotation processing in java / kotlin?

I'm new to annotation processing and code generation. I want to find out how can I perform such operation like appending new method to existing class. Here is an example of what I want to do:
Assume that we have a class with with custom annotations like this one:
class SourceClass {
#CustomAnnotation
fun annotatedFun1(vararg argument: Any) {
//Do something
}
#CustomAnnotation
fun annotatedFun2(vararg argument: Any) {
//Do something
}
fun someOtherFun() {
//Do something
}
}
And the result I want to get - extended copy of that class:
class ResultClass {
fun hasFunWithName(name: String): Boolean {
return (name in arrayOf("annotatedFun1", "annotatedFun2"))
}
fun callFunByName(name: String, vararg arguments: Any) {
when (name) {
"annotatedFun1" -> annotatedFun1(*arguments)
"annotatedFun2" -> annotatedFun2(*arguments)
}
}
fun annotatedFun1(vararg argument: Any) {
//Do something
}
fun annotatedFun2(vararg argument: Any) {
//Do something
}
fun someOtherFun() {
//Do something
}
}
I've already found out how to create annotation processor. I'm looking for a method to save all existing fields, properties and methods in source class and to append a few more methods to it.
If it is possible to modify class without creating new one - it would be perfect, but in all tutorials only new classes are created and I didn't find any example where all contents of source class are being copied to another one.
Please, do not advise to use reflection. I need this for android and so reflection is not the option cause of resources cost. I'm looking for compile-time solution.
It is required for custom script language implemented in app and should be used to simplify wrapper classes structure. When this job is done directly in code - it looks awful when such method count exceeds 20 per class.
Here is a good example of Java Annotation Processing I recently worked with.
It's an implementation of #Immutable annotation.
Check out ByteBuddy or Kotlin Poet to understand how additional code generation works.
For Kotlin you do almost the same, check this manual for Kotlin-specific steps.
With Kotlin, you can use extension functions and that is the recommended way of adding new functionality to existing classes that you don't control. https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/extensions.html
You may be abel to follow the pattern used by Project Lombok. See How does lombok work? or the source code for details.
Another option would be to write a new class that extends your source class:
class ResultClass : SourceClass {
fun hasFunWithName(name: String): Boolean {
return (name in arrayOf("annotatedFun1", "annotatedFun2"))
}
fun callFunByName(name: String, vararg arguments: Any) {
when (name) {
"annotatedFun1" -> annotatedFun1(*arguments)
"annotatedFun2" -> annotatedFun2(*arguments)
}
}
}
Or perhaps use composition instead and implemnent cover methods for all the public methods in SourceClass.
If you are not tied to doing this using annotation processing, you could use a separate piece of custom code to process the source code files before compiling. Maybe use a regular expression like /#CustomAnnotation\s+.*fun (\w+)\s*\(([^)]*)\)/gm (Test on Regex101) to find the annotated methods.
If I understood the requirement correctly, the goal is to implement something like described below.
You have a source file C.java that defines the class C like this:
public final class C
{
#Getter
#Setter
private int m_IntValue;
#Getter
#Constructor
private final String m_Text;
}
And now you want to know how to write an annotation processor that jumps in during compilation and modifies the source from C.java that the compiler sees to something like this:
public final class C
{
private int m_IntValue;
public final int getIntValue() { return m_IntValue; }
public final void setIntValue( final int intValue ) { m_IntValue = intValue; }
private final String m_Text;
public final String getText() { return m_Text; }
public C( final String text ) { m_Text = text; }
}
The bad news is, that this is not possible … not with an annotation processor, not for Java 15.
For Java 8 there was a way, using some internal classes with reflection to convince the AP to manipulate the already loaded source code in some way and let the compiler compile it a second time. Unfortunately, it failed more often than it worked …
Currently, an annotation processor can only create a new (in the sense of additional) source file. So one solution could be to extend the class (of course, that would not work for the sample class C above, because the class itself is final and all the attributes are private …
So writing a pre-processor would be another solution; you do not have a file C.java on your hard drive, but one named C.myjava that will be used by that preprocessor to generate C.java, and that in turn is used by the compiler. But that is not done by an annotation processor, but it may be possible to abuse it in that way.
You can also play around with the byte code that was generated by the compiler and add the missing (or additional) functionality there. But that would be really far away from annotation processing …
As a summary: today (as of Java 15), an annotation processor does not allow the manipulation of existing source code (you cannot even exclude some source from being compiled); you can only generate additional source files with an annotation processor.

kotlin annotation processing: check if given TypeElement is from kotlin-class

I am implementing annotation processing library that generates code using java poet based on classes that have specific annotation.
To also consume classes written in kotlin I've switched to kapt instead of apt in my sample project. It works with annotated java-classes just fine. Bun kotlin-classes have a different approach with accessing class fields: getters and setters should be used.
Is there a way to determine whether given class (more specifically - not a class but a TypeElement - since this is happening prior to compilation) is java-class or is written in kotlin? Based on that I can write code that generates fields accessing or getters-used accessing.
In theory any class compiled from kotlin will be annotated with kotlin.Metadata.
You can use the getAnnotation method on TypeElement to check if that annotation is present in order to verify if they were written in kotlin.
val metaDataClass = Class.forName("kotlin.Metadata").asSubclass(Annotation::class.java)
val isKotlinClass = <TypeElement>.getAnnotation(metaDataClass) != null
Version that works without having the kotlin standard library in the processing environment:
elementUtils.getAllAnnotationMirrors(typeElement).any {
elementUtils.getBinaryName(it.annotationType).contentEquals("kotlin.Metadata")
}

nameof equivalent in Java

C# 6.0 introduced the nameof() operator, that returns a string representing the name of any class / function / method / local-variable / property identifier put inside it.
If I have a class like this:
class MyClass
{
public SomeOtherClass MyProperty { get; set; }
public void MyMethod()
{
var aLocalVariable = 12;
}
}
I can use the operator like this:
// with class name:
var s = nameof(MyClass); // s == "MyClass"
// with properties:
var s = nameof(MyClass.OneProperty); // s == "OneProperty"
// with methods:
var s = nameof(MyClass.MyMethod); // s == "MyMethod"
// with local variables:
var s = nameof(aLocalVariable); // s == "aLocalVariable".
This is useful since the correct string is checked at compile time. If I misspell the name of some property/method/variable, the compiler returns an error. Also, if I refactor, all the strings are automatically updated. See for example this documentation for real use cases.
Is there any equivalent of that operator in Java? Otherwise, how can I achieve the same result (or similar)?
It can be done using runtime byte code instrumentation, for instance using Byte Buddy library.
See this library: https://github.com/strangeway-org/nameof
The approach is described here: http://in.relation.to/2016/04/14/emulating-property-literals-with-java-8-method-references/
Usage example:
public class NameOfTest {
#Test
public void direct() {
assertEquals("name", $$(Person.class, Person::getName));
}
#Test
public void properties() {
assertEquals("summary", Person.$(Person::getSummary));
}
}
Sadly, there is nothing like this. I had been looking for this functionality a while back and the answer seemed to be that generally speaking, this stuff does not exist.
See Get name of a field
You could, of course, annotate your field with a "Named" annotation to essentially accomplish this goal for your own classes. There's a large variety of frameworks that depend upon similar concepts, actually. Even so, this isn't automatic.
You can't.
You can get a Method or Field using reflection, but you'd have to hardcode the method name as a String, which eliminates the whole purpose.
The concept of properties is not built into java like it is in C#. Getters and setters are just regular methods. You cannot even reference a method as easily as you do in your question. You could try around with reflection to get a handle to a getter method and then cut off the get to get the name of the "property" it resembles, but that's ugly and not the same.
As for local variables, it's not possible at all.
You can't.
If you compile with debug symbols then the .class file will contain a table of variable names (which is how debuggers map variables back to your source code), but there's no guarantee this will be there and it's not exposed in the runtime.
I was also annoyed that there is nothing comparable in Java, so I implemented it myself: https://github.com/mobiuscode-de/nameof
You can simply use it like this:
Name.of(MyClass.class, MyClass::getProperty)
which would just return the String
"property"
It's also on , so you can add it to your project like this:
<dependency>
<groupId>de.mobiuscode.nameof</groupId>
<artifactId>nameof</artifactId>
<version>1.0</version>
</dependency>
or for Gradle:
implementation 'de.mobiuscode.nameof:nameof:1.0'
I realize that it is quite similar to the library from strangeway, but I thought it might be better not to introduce the strange $/$$ notation and enhanced byte code engineering. My library just uses a proxy class on which the getter is called on to determine the name of the passed method. This allows to simply extract the property name.
I also created a blog post about the library with more details.
Lombok has an experimental feature #FieldNameConstants
After adding annotation you get inner type Fields with field names.
#FieldNameConstants
class MyClass {
String myProperty;
}
...
String s = MyClass.Fields.myProperty; // s == "myProperty"

C# extension methods in Java using Scala

I need to create some extension methods in my Java code. I've read some posts here in SO and people suggest XTend or Scala in order to achieve this.
Now, my question would be.. if i write kind of an Adapter layer in Scala (adding there my extension methods) and then using that project as a dependency for my own Java project, are those extended methods available for me to use, or they are defined just for the 'scope of Scala project' and then the JVM output cannot provide those new methods to the other project using it?
EDIT:
What i need to do is to extend a full hierarchy of classes in a given library and give some new functionality. As for Java's first approach I should extend every class in that hierarchy creating my own hierarchy of extended classes adding the new method there. I would like to avoid this and give the final user the sense of native functionality in the original hierarchy.
Regards.
As mentioned above in the comments, it is very close to C# but not exactly there because of the type erasure. For example, this works fine:
object myLibExtensions {
implicit class TypeXExtension( val obj: TypeX ) extends AnyRef {
def myCustomFunction( a: String ): String = {
obj.someMethod(a)
}
}
}
It will act somewhat similar to C# extension methods, i.e. create static method wrappers in reasonable cases (but not always).
The only thing I am missing in Scala is that you can't (or at least I couldn't figure out how to) return the values of the types being extended. For example, assume I want to have something like an extension method "withMeta" that works as follows:
class TypeY extends TypeX { def methodOfY(...) ...}
var y: TypeY = ....
y.withMeta(...).methodOfY(...)
The following didn't work for me:
object myLibExtensions {
private val something = ....
implicit class Extension[T<:TypeX]( val obj: T ) extends AnyRef {
def withMeta( meta: Meta[T] ): T = {
something.associateMeta(obj,meta)
val
}
}
}
... because T is being erased to TypeX. So effectively you will have to write extensions for all specific leaf classes of the hierarchy in this case, which is sad.

Categories

Resources