I'm looking for some ideas on how to compile Java code with some other pieces of code missing (method calls). I am fully aware that javac will not allow you to compile Java files if cannot find all dependencies. But maybe there is some way how to bypass it, something like force compile.
My bytecode knowledge is not so good but I think some method invoke is just full package definition of class and method name with parameters. So if compiler just puts this data to class file and assume in running process dependency will be available (if not simple NoSuchMethodExp).
Only workaround so far I found is to create empty missing class files with empty methods to "cheat" compiler. Works perfectly but there should be easier way :)
Any ideas?
Use Interfaces.
Create the interfaces that have the methods you need. At runtime, inject (Spring, Guice, etc.) or generate (cglib ...) classes that implement the interface.
If you're modifying a jar, you can extract the class files you are not modifying to another directory and include that in the classpath. That way they will be available to the compiler.
Bad luck! Probably all you can do is to create mock objects for missing parts of code just to compile your code (empty methods, so the compiler can find it).
Another question - if you miss some classes, how will you execute that code?
UPDATED according to information provided:
Well, there is another option to modify classes in jar, you can use AOP, and to make it done read about AspectJ - actually for me this is the easiest option (typically you need to spend time mocking objects, writing empty methods, so I would contribute that time to study new technology, which will help you many times ;)
And btw the easiest way to implement it, if you use Eclipse, is:
install AJDT
create aspect project
create aspect which modifies code (depending on what you need to change)
add jar file you want to modify
immediately get modified code in
another already packed jar file
Sounds magically :)
In this case you don't need any dependencies in classpath, except for libraries which are needed for new code you add!
Methods aren't dependencies. They are part of the class definition. The only places the java runtime looks for method definitions is in the class def that was compiled at compile time and in its parent classes. If you're problem is that a super class is incomplete, I don't think I can help you.
If not, you could define some of these methods as abstract and than have a child class implement them.
What kind of code is missing? Normally this happens if you refer to libraries your compiler can't find. Maybe you simply need to extend the classpath the compiler is searching for classes.
If you really refer to code that is not available yet you need to implement at least those methods you refer to. But that sounds strange... maybe you can clear things up.
Related
I´m trying to add a plugin system to my app. I have an abstract class that plugins must extend. This class provide usuful methods so I really need it. The problem is that these plugins could be written by anyone so I suppouse that they'll need the abstract class code to be able to compile their code.
I don´t want to complicate the process of creating a plugin. Is there a way to compile the code without know the abstract class body (only its methods)?
Thanks in advance.
Is there a way to compile the code without know the abstract class body (only its methods)?
No. In order to to compile a class declared as
class A extends B
you'll have to have B in source format in the source path or in .class format on the class path.
(If knowing only the methods is sufficient for writing the plugin, it sounds more like you're after an interface than an abstract class.)
I don´t want to complicate the process of creating a plugin.
Providing the compiled .class file of B is completely uncomplicated and probably the best practice in this scenario.
Actually, having an API at hand through a .jar-file containing the relevant classes and interfaces is probably the standard.
To be clear:
Take the classes that are relevant for plugin-development, compile them, and put them in, say pluginapi.jar
Distribute the .jar and tell plugin developers that their plugins should compile, provided the pluginapi.jar
Ask the plugindevelopers to provide you with plugin.jar (not necessarily including pluginapi classes)
In your application, make sure that the plugin API classes are present, for instance by including them the class path.
Load the plugin classes.
You could ask your plugin authors to provide you some classes with some specified methods and invoke those using reflection. This would mean that they could write a plugin that can be compiled without access to any of your code.
But it would also severely limit their possibilities: How should the plugin interact with your system if they have no way of calling into it? Since the only sane way to provide that is to make some classes (or interfaces) accessible, you can just as well provide an interface (or abstract class) that they need to implement/extend.
You could put that interface (and all interfaces/classes visible to plugins) in a separate .jar file. This way they only need that jar file to compile a plugin.
You can just provide a jar file with all necessry java files. But remember, that once you publish the api, you should be very careful with changing it.
Alternatively you can go around by not forcing your users to extend a class or implement an interface but have them provide a function with a certain signature -- which then you can call via reflection. In this case they won't need anything from you, however, if they get the function wrong obviously you won't be able to call the plugin.
In these cases Java scripting can be very useful. Have your plugins written in Groovy and the codes can be easily (down)loaded and executed in your framework, something like this http://groovy.codehaus.org/Embedding+Groovy
Is there a way to modify .class files in order to add Java annotations to certain methods? Basically I want to traverse methods of each class file in a jar file and annotate certain ones. Note that this is not at run-time while using the jar file. Rather, after I'm done I want to have modified class files with the annotations.
I do have access to the source code, so if there's an automatic source code modifier, that would work as well...
I'm assuming I'll need a tool such as Javassist or ASM. If so, which one should I use and how would I go about it?
Actually, this is a classic use case for AspectJ:
declare #method : public * BankAccount+.*(..) : #Secured(role="supervisor")
While I will grant you that direct byte code manipulation is more powerful, AspectJ is much more user-friendly, and it immediately gives you compiler warnings when you are doing something wrong.
Also, if you use Load Time Weaving, you can leave the original library jar unchanged, because the weaving happens at class-load time.
Reference:
Declare Annotation
AspectJ in Action (book)
Googling for an hour or so turned this article up which seems to completely answer my question: use ASM. To write class files using the changed bytecode, use ClassWriter.
Well, time to get to work then, I guess. :)
I have a functionality that I wish to provide to a customer for a software mockup that we are preparing - and I want to know if it's
possible
intelligent (a.k.a. not stupid)
the best thing
I want the customer to be able to write a java class that implements my Computable interface and stick it in some predetermined folder. This folder will contain the .java files rather than .class files. Then, at runtime, I want my program to search that folder and extract all of the Computables from that folder and store them in a map from the name of the Computable to the Computable object. The Computable should only have a default constructor and the it interface will only have one method called compute which maps an array of Object to an Object.
The Java Compiler API introduced in Java SE 6 should give you what you need.
You may find Google Reflections useful to find classes implementing/extending a certain interface/superclass in the classpath. It's then as straightforward as
Reflections reflections = new Reflections("my.project.prefix");
Set<Class<? extends SomeClassOrInterface>> subTypes = reflections.getSubTypesOf(SomeClassOrInterface.class);
Then, to test if it indeed has a no-arg default constructor, just check for each if Class#newInstance() doesn't throw any exception.
There are several suggestions provided as answers to this question.
Here too On-the-fly, in-memory java code compilation for Java 5 and Java 6
If it's easy enough to compile at runtime that would be fine.
You can use javax.tools to do the compilation as needed. Create dynamic applications with javax.tools may help, too. It's also possible to do it in memory.
One caveat: using the compiler creates a dependency on the JDK; the JRE alone is insufficient.
take a look: Find Java classes implementing an interface
I think this would be simpler if you allowed your customer to type in a code declaration using something like Groovy, which is Java-ish enough, and easy to execute at runtime from a String value.
It's easy enough to iterate through the list of files in a folder. Someone mentioned that it's possible to call the Java compiler from Java (if you re-distribute the JDK, which I think is a point whose legality needs checking!!) That's much of the battle.
You seem to have a fixed model in your mind where only files fulfilling a certain interface are extracted from the folder. I think this is where your method needs to give a little. The sensible way (IMO) to do this would be to compile all files in that folder, and then with their classes stashed away somewhere, you can load and reflect them and then determine which of them "do" the interface and which don't. Those that don't will have been needlessly loaded into your JVM, but unless it's intentionally very space-wasteful, code you don't execute can't harm your program.
Having determined which ones do the computable thing, you can then store those classes (or instances thereof) in a Collection and do whatever you like with them. You simply ignore the other ones.
You could use BeanShell. This library is small and doesn't require the JDK. It is used in a number of IDE and web servers. The latest version appears to have the support you need loading .java files from the class path. (Still in beta)
The title speaks for itself. The language is Java.
Yes, there is. This is however a tedious and expensive work. You need to crawl through all class files and all JAR files with help of ClassLoader#getResources() and a shot of java.io.File and load all classes of it with help of Class#forName() and finally check if the method is there by Class#getMethod().
However, there are 3rd party API's which can take the tedious work from hands, but it is still expensive, because loading a class would cause its static initializers being executed.
A cleaner way is to make use of annotations and annotate the methods in question and then make use of libraries which searches for classes/methods/fields based on the annotations, such as Google Reflections.
On the other hand, if the entire package name or the JAR file name is known beforehand, then the work will be less tedious and expensive (no need to do stuff recursively nor to load the all of the classes of entire classpath).
Update: I remember, I ever wrote sample code to achieve something like that, you can find it here. It's good to start with, you only need to change it a bit to check the method.
No, you can't, in general. If you could get a complete list of available classes you could check each of them using reflection - but you can't ask a classloader for a list of everything that's available. (For instance, it may be fetching classes over HTTP, and may not know all the files available.)
If you knew that you were interested in classes in a jar file, however, you could open the jar file, find all the class files within it and ask the classloader for those classes. It would be somewhat fiddly.
What's the bigger picture here? There may be a better way to approach the problem.
Also, in Eclipse, you can simply ask for this :
Clic on the method, and type Ctrl-T.
It may not be best practice but are there ways of removing unsused classes from a third party's jar files. Something that looks at the way in which my classes are using the library and does some kind of coverage analysis, then spits out another jar with all of the untouched classes removed.
Obviously there are issues with this. Specifically, the usage scenario I put it though may not use all classes all the time.
But neglecting these problems, can it be done in principle?
There is a way.
The JarJar project does this AFAIR. The first goal of the JarJar project is to allow one to embed third party libraries in your own jar, changing the package structure if necessary. Doing so it can strip out the classes that are not needed.
Check it out at http://code.google.com/p/jarjar/.
Here is a link about shrinking jars: http://sixlegs.com/blog/java/jarjar-keep.html
There is a tool in Ant called a classfileset. You specify the list of root classes that you know you need, and then the classfileset recursively analyzes their code to find all dependencies.
Alternatively, you could develop a good test suite that exercises all of the functions that you need, then run your tests under a test coverage tool. The tool will tell you which classes (and statement in them) were actually utilized. This could give you an even smaller set of code than what you'd find with static analysis.
I use ProGuard for this. As well as being an excellent obfuscator, it has a code shrinking phase which can combine multiple JARs and then strip out any unused classes or class members. It does an excellent job at shrinking.
At a previous job, I used a Java obfuscator that as well as obfuscating the code, also removed classes and methods that weren't being used. If you were doing "Class.byName" or any other type of reflection stuff, you needed to tell the obfuscator because it couldn't tell by inspecting the code what classes or methods called by reflection.
The problem, of course, is that you don't know if other parts of the third party library are doing any reflection, and so removing an "unused" class might cause things to break in an obscure case that you haven't tested.
jar is just a zip file, so I guess you can. If you could get to the source, it's cleaner. Maybe try disassembling the class?
Adding to this question, can that improve performance? Since the classes not used would not be JIT compiled improving startup time or does the java automatically detect that while compiling to bytecode and do not even deal with the code that is not used?
This would be an interesting project (has anyone done it already?)
I presume you'd give the tool your jar(s) as a starting point, and the library jar to clean up. It could use reflection to determine which classes your jar(s) reference directly, and which are used indirectly down the call tree (this is not trivial at all, but doable). If it encounters any reflection code in any of the two places, it should give a very loud warning.