Find Lombok getter/setter via Java Reflection API - java

Is it possible to find/invoke a getter or setter generated by the Lombok library? Standard class.getMethod doesn't work.

Yes; there is no way to differentiate writing out the stuff lombok makes for you by hand, vs letting lombok generate it, once we're down to class files (except via, I guess, line numbers in the debug table). standard class.getMethod will work just fine. If you're having a problem with it, perhaps edit the question (or ask a new one). You can also use javap (the java decompiler, ships with your JDK installation) to confirm that these methods are just there, indistinguishable from handwritten ones.

Related

Java #FinalArgs annotation - how to?

I am transitioning from Scala to Java and miss having final parameters by default. I explored an experimental version of the Lombok library here (background info here) which had files hinting at this functionality:
"src/core/lombok/experimental/FinalArgs.java", "src/core/lombok/javac/handlers/HandleFinalArgs.java", "src/core/lombok/eclipse/handlers/HandleFinalArgs.java"
I have never done much reflection or annotation writing in Java, so points to anyone who can figure out how to get a working #FinalArgs annotation into my current Java project (not connected to Lombak - my team is not willing to use a modified/custom version of Lombak). First prize to anyone who can also explain what is going on.
You can't get such an annotation without doing what Lombok does (installing plugins in IDE's and possibly installing a vm agent).
However, you can set most IDE's to give you a warning or error if a parameter was re-assigned.
There's no further benefit in making them truly final. The JIT is smart enough to figure that out on its own.
Lombok will not add this feature. You can instruct your IDE or static source analyzer to generate warnings, but since java8, there is no added benefit to make variables and parameters final. If they are effectively final (never reassigned) they can be used inside lambda's and anonymous inner classes as if they were final.

Providing Dummy-Annotation for older Java compilers

I'm working on a Java library that I would like to be able to use across a couple of different Java compiler versions. Some annotations (specifically #SafeVarargs) only exist on some of these compiler versions and generate errors in others.
Especially for something like #SafeVarargs, which serves mostly as a marker to suppress warnings rather than actually changing the output of the compiler, I would like to be able to use these annotations and simply provide a dummy-implementation if an earlier compiler is missing them.
How would I go about doing this?
I guess you could just create surrogate implementations of those annotations and put them in a Jar that is added to the classpath making sure that the system/compiler provided one take priority when resolved by the corresponding class loader.
For example you can just copy the code of SafeVarargs from here

Error while compiling thrift generated classes with Java 1.5

`Platform`: Windows 7, MinGW, MSYS, Java 1.5
I have thrift 0.9.1 compiler (prebuilt for windows) and source. I use Ant to build java library.
I create one thrift idl and compile it with the compiler. No problem in generating code files.
I add these files in my project, and that add slf4j (downloaded from their site) and libthrift.
Most of the errors that I have previously (imports etc) are gone except for errors related to overriding methods.
So basically it complains like:
The method clear() of type Server must override a superclass method
and similarly for compareTo, write, read etc. In short it complains about all methods that are overridden. This is all thrift compiler generated code and I haven't changed anything.
Is there any incompatibility? I cannot really find any mention of that. I have tried removing and then adding the libraries, I have also tried cleaning, refreshing, validating the project but the errors are still there.
I have also tried to compile the code (thrift code) but MinGW is also a huge headache. It cannot find configure even though I have installed it. And if I run the msys console, it is able to configure but cannot make complaining about inttypes.h not present (which is not in msys include directory but is present in MinGW include directory.).
Any suggestion would be appreciated.
Are you using Java 5? With Java 5 #Override doesn't search for methods on interfaces, only on superclasses.
If you are using a Java 5 compiler trying using a more recent javac (preferably 7 or 8) and see of that works.
EDIT:
Not sure if this is in your version of Thrift, but in mine it looks like there is a flag called java5 that you an specify when generating code to specify that you want the generated code to be Java 5 compliant
java (Java):
beans: Members will be private, and setter methods will return void.
private-members: Members will be private, but setter methods will return 'this' like usual.
nocamel: Do not use CamelCase field accessors with beans.
fullcamel: Convert underscored_accessor_or_service_names to camelCase.
android: Generated structures are Parcelable.
android_legacy: Do not use java.io.IOException(throwable) (available for Android 2.3 and above).
java5: Generate Java 1.5 compliant code (includes android_legacy flag).
reuse-objects: Data objects will not be allocated, but existing instances will be used (read and write).
sorted_containers:
Use TreeSet/TreeMap instead of HashSet/HashMap as a implementation of set/map.

Manually add a method call to a class file?

I need to manually add a method call to a class file without decompiling and recompiling the code because It depends on thousands of other classes and I don't wan't have to do more than is nessescary. I know java but not how class files are made.
Any help is appreciated.
EDIT:
I am not the owner of the source and I need this to work on any computer, which means I cannot redistribute the sources and have them compiled realtime while my patcher is working.
You have the source code, and you have all other classes compiled. So you can recompile just that source file, passing compiled classes as parameters to java compiler with -classpath option.
You should use ASM or Javaassist to manipulate the bytecode. ASM is a little bit more complex and requires you to understand more about the JVM, but it's faster. Javaassist doesn't require you to know much about the JVM's internals.
However, I don't see why you can't just recompile that single sourcefile? If you only need to add this method once, it's very inefficient to learn ASM or Javaassist.
How about subclassing? Then you don't need to touch the sources.
So if you have the source code and want to add some methods into only one class. Then you don't have to worry about other classes even they are dependent on your current modified class. Re-compiling a file doesn't affect other classes. Since the output will be produced at run-time.
If your class is not declared final and the method you are interested is not final, you can extend the class and override just that method.
Just change the source code, recompile ! Everything will work fine. Subclassing won't work .Because Already existing classes won't know about the new subclass until you change their code to use the new subclass instead of old superclass.
For manual editing of classfiles, I'd recommend Krakatau. (Disclosure, I wrote it). It lets you disassemble a classfile, edit it, and reassemble. There are other assemblers out there, but AFAIK, Krakatau is the only one that supports all the weird edge cases in the classfile format.
The main caveat is that Krakatau by default does not preserve certain optional debugging attributes (specifically LineNumberTable, LocalVariableTable, and LocalVariableTypeTable), since there is no simple way to represent them in a human editable format, and failing to edit them when the bytecode changes will result in a verification error. Most likely you don't actually need this though so it shouldn't matter.
The other caveat of course is that you have to understand bytecode. But if you don't, you won't be able to manually edit classfiles anyway.
I got it now! I Created fake source files with the same names/methods but didn't add anything else except for class and method names. That way I only needed to pack the ones that are directly linked to my Class file. But now compiling takes a few milliseconds whereas it used to take around 124s, Lol. Works great!

Deprecating an java JRE method

I would like to mark usage of certain methods provide by the JRE as deprecated. How do I do this?
You can't. Only code within your control can have the #Deprecated annotation added. Any attempt to reverse engineer the bytecode will result in a non-portable JRE. This is contrary to Java's write once, run anywhere methodology.
you can't deprecate JRE methods, but you can add warnings or even compile errors to your build system i.e. using AspectJ or forbid the use of given methods in the IDE.
For example in Eclipse:
Go to Project properties -->Java Compiler --> Errors Warnings, Then enable project specific settings, Expand Deprecated and restrited APIs category
"Forbidden reference (acess rule)"
Obviously you could instrument or override the class adding #Deprecated annotation, but it's not a clean solution.
Add such restrictions to your coding guidelines, and enforce as part of your code review process.
You only can do it, if and only if you are building your own JRE! In that case just add #Deprecated above the corresponding code block! But if you are using Oracle's JRE, you are no where to do so!
In what context? Do you mean you want to be able to easily configure your IDE to inhibit use of certain API? Or are you trying to dictate to the world what APIs you prohibit? Or are you trying to do something at runtime?
If the first case, Eclipse, and I assume other IDEs, allow you to mark any API as forbidden, discouraged, or accessible at the package or class level.
If you mean the second, you can't, of course. That would be silly.
If you are trying to prohibit certain methods from being called at runtime, you can configure a security policy to prevent code loaded from specified locations from being able to call specific methods that check with the SecurityManager, if one is installed.
You can compile your own version of the class and add it to the boot class path or lib/ext directory. http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/ext/basics/install.html This will change the JDK and the JRE.
In fact you can remove it for compiling and your program won't compile if it is used.
Snihalani: Just so that I get this straight ...
You want to 'deprecate methods in the JRE' in order to 'Making sure people don't use java's implementation and use my implementation from now on.' ?
First of all: you can't change anything in the JRE, neither are you allowed to, it's property of Oracle. Uou might be able to change something locally if you want to go through the trouble, but that 'll just be in your local JRE, not in the ones that can be downloaded from the Oracle webpage.
Next to that, nobody has your implementation, so how would we be able to use it anyway? The implementations provided by Oracle do exactly what they should do, and when a flaw/bug/... is found it'll be corrected or replaced by a new method (at which point the original method becomes deprecated).
But, what mostly worries me, is that you would go and change implementations with something you came up with. Reminds me quite lot of phishing and such techniques, having us run your code, without knowing what it does, without even knowing we are running your code. After all, if you would have access to the original code and "build" the JRE, what's to stop you from altering the code in the original method?
Deprecated is a way for the author to say:
"Yup ... I did this in the past, but it seems that there are problems with the method.
just in order not to change the behaviour of existing applications using this method, I will not change this method, rather mark it as deprecated, and add a method that solves this problem".
You are not the author, so it isn't up to you to decide whether or not the methods work the way they should anyway.

Categories