Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M6 #117

lomigmegard · 2017-05-26T14:58:39Z

This PR fixes #115.

I had to update the two CustomRunnerApp in the scripted tests two use the main() method. I ran into the IncompatibleClassChangeError issue, changes fix #66.

Now you have to use ^ scripted and ^ publishSigned to cross-compile with the correct sbt version (see the 0.13.16-M1 release notes).

lomigmegard · 2017-05-26T15:02:26Z

Note that there are still one or two deprecation warnings that can be addressed in a subsequent PR.

ktoso

Looks good, thanks a ton :)

ktoso · 2017-05-26T15:17:00Z

README.md

-compile in Jmh <<= (compile in Jmh) dependsOn (compile in Test)
-run in Jmh <<= (run in Jmh) dependsOn (Keys.compile in Jmh)
+compile in Jmh := (compile in Jmh).dependsOn(compile in Test).value
+run in Jmh := (run in Jmh).dependsOn(Keys.compile in Jmh).value


cool thanks

ktoso · 2017-05-26T15:18:57Z

version.sbt

@@ -1 +1 @@
-version in ThisBuild := "0.2.25"
+version in ThisBuild := "0.3.0-SNAPSHOT"


yeah, I guess hm... timing should work out fine I hope

If you prefer 0.2.26-SNAPSHOT that's fine too. No real reason to bump to 0.3 tbh.

Yeah, let's not bump the minor for now.
It likely deserves a 1.0 soon anyway.

ktoso · 2017-05-26T15:21:18Z

build.sbt

@@ -13,12 +13,12 @@ val jmhVersion = {
 val commonSettings = Seq(
  organization := "pl.project13.scala",

-  scalaVersion := "2.10.6",
+  crossSbtVersions := Vector("0.13.15", "1.0.0-M5"),


lomigmegard · 2017-05-26T15:25:38Z

build.sbt

@@ -113,7 +108,7 @@ lazy val extras = project
  .settings(sonatypeSettings: _*)
  .settings(
    name := "sbt-jmh-extras",
+    scalaVersion := "2.12.2",


That's the only thing I am not sure about, since it's pure Java we may want to force it to target 1.6 to be able to use the plugin with a 1.6 JVM (using sbt 0.13.15)?

@retronym do you guys still care about benchmarking against JDK6 with JMH?

We're only benchmarking on JDK8+ now. But sbt-jmh-extras doesn't actually depend on Scala (see setting below this line), so I'm not sure if this is needed at all.

We do benchmark on Scala 2.13.x, which is a reason to avoid a Scala dependency for this module.

Yeah, extras is java only so the question is more about what jdk target should be set here.
We're also fine in akka with 8+ nowadays I think

It should still be possible to use a custom JDK for the forks with jmh:run -jvm /jdk/1.6, right?

Hm, should work but perhaps best to sanity check - I can look at it tomorrow :)

ktoso · 2017-06-12T09:23:44Z

Bumped to M6 to see if it builds

ktoso · 2017-06-12T09:46:43Z

scipted breaks:


java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: sbt.test.ScriptedTests$.run(java.io.File, boolean, [Ljava.lang.String;, java.io.File, [Ljava.lang.String;)
	at java.lang.Class.getMethod(Class.java:1778)
	at sbt.ScriptedPlugin$$anonfun$scriptedRunTask0.89€.apply(ScriptedPlugin.scala:39)
	at sbt.ScriptedPlugin$$anonfun$scriptedRunTask0.89€.apply(ScriptedPlugin.scala:38)
	at scala.Function1$$anonfun$compose0.89€.apply(Function1.scala:47)
	at sbt.$tilde$greater$$anonfun$$u22190.89€.apply(TypeFunctions.scala:40)
	at sbt.std.Transform$$anon3.56€.work(System.scala:63)
	at sbt.Execute$$anonfun$submit0.89€$$anonfun$apply0.89€.apply(Execute.scala:228)
	at sbt.Execute$$anonfun$submit0.89€$$anonfun$apply0.89€.apply(Execute.scala:228)
	at sbt.ErrorHandling$.wideConvert(ErrorHandling.scala:17)
	at sbt.Execute.work(Execute.scala:237)
	at sbt.Execute$$anonfun$submit0.89€.apply(Execute.scala:228)
	at sbt.Execute$$anonfun$submit0.89€.apply(Execute.scala:228)
	at sbt.ConcurrentRestrictions$$anon3.56€$$anonfun0.89€.apply(ConcurrentRestrictions.scala:159)
	at sbt.CompletionService$$anon1.78€.call(CompletionService.scala:28)
	at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)
	at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
	at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)
	at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
	at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
	at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
[error] (plugin/*:scriptedRun) java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: sbt.test.ScriptedTests$.run(java.io.File, boolean, [Ljava.lang.String;, java.io.File, [Ljava.lang.String;)
[error] Total time: 108 s, completed Jun 12, 2017 9:33:45 AM

is this expected @eed3si9n plugin upgrade or sth else?

jvican · 2017-06-13T21:48:55Z

That's sbt/sbt#3245.

Can you update with the following snippet and try again? It should work:

ScriptedPlugin.scripted := {
  val args = ScriptedPlugin.asInstanceOf[{
    def scriptedParser(f: File): complete.Parser[Seq[String]]
  }].scriptedParser(sbtTestDirectory.value).parsed
  val prereq: Unit = scriptedDependencies.value
  try {
    if((sbtVersion in pluginCrossBuild).value == "1.0.0-M6") {
      ScriptedPlugin.scriptedTests.value.asInstanceOf[{
        def run(
          x1: File,
          x2: Boolean,
          x3: Array[String],
          x4: File,
          x5: Array[String],
          x6: java.util.List[File]
        ): Unit
      }].run(
        sbtTestDirectory.value,
        scriptedBufferLog.value,
        args.toArray,
        sbtLauncher.value,
        scriptedLaunchOpts.value.toArray,
        new java.util.ArrayList()
      )
    } else {
      ScriptedPlugin.scriptedTests.value.asInstanceOf[{
        def run(
          x1: File,
          x2: Boolean,
          x3: Array[String],
          x4: File,
          x5: Array[String]
        ): Unit
      }].run(
        sbtTestDirectory.value,
        scriptedBufferLog.value,
        args.toArray,
        sbtLauncher.value,
        scriptedLaunchOpts.value.toArray
      )
    }
  } catch { case e: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException => throw e.getCause }
}

I'll try to fix this at the core and you can ditch that code in the next RC.

lomigmegard · 2017-06-14T12:15:53Z

@ktoso I will try to add this fix tonight, or you prefer to wait for a proper fix in the upstream project?

jvican · 2017-06-14T14:23:36Z

I would appreciate if you use that fix. We don't know if this is going to be released before the release candidate yet, and this is blocking my migration to 1.0 in Zinc: sbt/zinc#316.

jvican · 2017-06-14T17:55:34Z

@lomigmegard Thanks. Tests are passing @ktoso.

ktoso · 2017-06-15T05:20:52Z

Thanks a ton @lomigmegard @jvican
Shall I release a version then?

jvican · 2017-06-15T07:14:52Z

Yes please :)

ktoso · 2017-06-27T09:03:28Z

So... I'm unable to publish correctly for 0.13.16-M1 (so that it lands as 2.12). I don't see how to solve it, requesting help @eed3si9n @jvican

^publish ing also does not work correctly, it releases under 2.10

ktoso · 2017-06-27T09:05:37Z

Ok, managed to get it working. ^ was failing before it got to the right version.

lomigmegard · 2017-06-27T09:07:50Z

Yay!!

holgerbrandl · 2017-09-21T13:02:28Z

I'm still seeing the IncompatibleClassChangeError error when having an object Foo extends App in the sources. I'm using sbt-jmh v0.2.24 along with sbt.version v0.13.16 and scalaVersion=2.11.11. Is there a newer plugin version available which I could use?
Or should sumbit it as another ticket?

retronym · 2017-09-21T19:19:36Z

This is a Scala compiler bug. You need to abstain from using App in projects that are classpath scanned by java annotation processors (like JMH) as a workaround scala/bug#10487

holgerbrandl · 2017-09-25T11:54:55Z

Thanks for pointing that out.

Fix sbt deprecation warnings.

217ed07

ktoso approved these changes May 26, 2017

View reviewed changes

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017

View reviewed changes

lomigmegard added 2 commits May 26, 2017 17:30

Cross-build the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M5.

498d7b2

Update Travis file to use Oracle SDK version 1.8.

f50b284

lomigmegard force-pushed the sbt_1.0 branch from 657fe17 to f50b284 Compare May 26, 2017 15:31

tyrcho mentioned this pull request May 26, 2017

JMH issue with Bundler huiwang/codingame-scala-kit#20

Closed

build M6

ace1f4e

jvican mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2017

Set up scripted suite with failing test for #2 lucidsoftware/neo-sbt-scalafmt#8

Merged

lomigmegard changed the title ~~Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M5~~ Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M6 Jun 14, 2017

Fix the scripted plugin issue due to sbt/sbt/issues/3245

e786a52

ktoso merged commit db26a9c into sbt:master Jun 15, 2017

jvican mentioned this pull request Jun 15, 2017

Release plugin for sbt 1.0.0-M6 sbt/sbt-header#119

Closed

lomigmegard deleted the sbt_1.0 branch June 27, 2017 09:15

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M6 #117

Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M6 #117

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017 •

edited

Loading

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017 •

edited

Loading

ktoso left a comment

ktoso May 26, 2017

ktoso May 26, 2017

lomigmegard May 26, 2017

ktoso May 26, 2017

ktoso May 26, 2017

lomigmegard May 26, 2017

ktoso May 26, 2017

retronym May 30, 2017

retronym May 30, 2017

ktoso May 30, 2017

retronym May 30, 2017

ktoso May 30, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 12, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 12, 2017

jvican commented Jun 13, 2017

lomigmegard commented Jun 14, 2017

jvican commented Jun 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

jvican commented Jun 14, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 15, 2017

jvican commented Jun 15, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 27, 2017 •

edited

Loading

ktoso commented Jun 27, 2017

lomigmegard commented Jun 27, 2017

holgerbrandl commented Sep 21, 2017

retronym commented Sep 21, 2017 via email

holgerbrandl commented Sep 25, 2017

		@@ -1 +1 @@
		version in ThisBuild := "0.2.25"
		version in ThisBuild := "0.3.0-SNAPSHOT"

Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M6 #117

Cross-compile the plugin against 0.13.15 and 1.0.0-M6 #117

Conversation

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017 • edited Loading

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017 • edited Loading

ktoso left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ktoso commented Jun 12, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 12, 2017

jvican commented Jun 13, 2017

lomigmegard commented Jun 14, 2017

jvican commented Jun 14, 2017 • edited Loading

jvican commented Jun 14, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 15, 2017

jvican commented Jun 15, 2017

ktoso commented Jun 27, 2017 • edited Loading

ktoso commented Jun 27, 2017

lomigmegard commented Jun 27, 2017

holgerbrandl commented Sep 21, 2017

retronym commented Sep 21, 2017 via email

holgerbrandl commented Sep 25, 2017

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017 •

edited

Loading

lomigmegard commented May 26, 2017 •

edited

Loading

jvican commented Jun 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

ktoso commented Jun 27, 2017 •

edited

Loading