feat: add a static method to getting started with one single line of code #1559
Conversation
|
Nice! It is true that Launcher is not intuitive and I am often fighting with initial configuration of Spoon too. |
| @@ -798,4 +800,12 @@ public CtModel getModel() { | |||
| return factory.getModel(); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| /** returns the AST of an inline class */ | |||
| public static CtClass<?> parseClass(String code) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure about your method return: I think this method will be quickly used with code containing multiple types (enum + class for example or multiple classes).
Then I see two solutions:
- Either the method return a list of CtTypes (and then we may have to rename it)
- Either it checks that the model contains only one CtClass (and then we explictely do not accept interfaces or enum, and most importantly we give a comprehensive error for the user)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or even code can contain only an interface...
I would return a CtType.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The idea of this PR is to have the easiest possible introduction to Spoon. Having CtClass means that users would have directly getConstructors etc. which they would naturally expect (which is not in CtType). CtType is a slight less natural, more abstract concept. Once newcomers understand this method, they would obviously move to the complete configurable Launcher and the rest of the metamodel (incl CtType)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm ok for keeping CtClass return but we should then check the type before casting, to help the user in case he did not pass a simple class.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I would create a new Launcher instead of adding a new method in a class that contains already to much stuff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
new Launcher
may be yes! But only as a replacement/wrapper of old non intuitive Launcher. I do not think we should have many ways/launchers how to start processing. The one "well designed" launcher would be nice ... but I actually have no constructive suggestion how it should look like. I just have problems with the old Launcher.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe something as a LauncherBuilder:
CtModel model = new LauncherBuilder().useAutoimport()
.useNoclasspath()
.addInputSource("./myDirectory/")
.addInputSource("./anotherOne")
.setOutputDir("./target")
.build();There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes exactly! But someone should analyze all Launcher use cases and organize them into intuitive API. I am not the one who knows use cases of Launcher well enough. Let's make an issue where we can build such a concept.
Indeed, we need to improve the documentation of the Launcher. |
|
There is a confusion there. |
Yep, that's why we opened a new issue to discuss the design of a new launcher. |
For me the design of this PR is wrong. It will introduce more confusion in the API than solve issues. |
No description provided.