Compile time ViewRegistry mechanism for kotlin

[rjrjr]

Swift was able to drop ViewRegistry in favor of a compile time pattern. Now that compiler plugins are here, shouldn't kotlin be able to do the same?

[zach-klippenstein]

On a scale of "fancy lint check" to "productionize keep-87", what exactly are you proposing? Both those options are significantly more effort and maintenance commitment than what swift has.

[rjrjr]

I have no real idea, but lint check sounds more like it. Just wanted a place to track any ideas that occur.

…

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 4:24 PM Zach Klippenstein ***@***.***> wrote: On a scale of "fancy lint check" to "productionize keep-87", what exactly are you proposing? Both those options are significantly more effort and maintenance commitment than what swift has. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/square/workflow/issues/1205#issuecomment-643691783>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAOMCHMMCJMHSONC74SPGH3RWQDDXANCNFSM4N5EDLSQ> .

[zach-klippenstein]

We've collected quite a few lint check issues. It would be interesting to see if we could build a thin compiler plugin layer that would expose workflow-specific syntax elements, and then implement a lot of checks on top of that.

Or build a similar layer on top of ktlint's API for that matter. I'm not sure which one is better to work with.

@vRallev Have you lint checks? How would you compare lint or ktlint's API to the compiler plugin API for analysing expressions?

[vRallev]

I'm missing context what Swift is doing. Although you can, I wouldn't implement Lint checks as a compiler plugin. KtLint works with Psi elements, like compiler plugins do during the analysis phase. A compiler plugin feels like an overkill. It would run for every build whereas you should run Lint checks only manually.

[zach-klippenstein]

Good point. There are some other things we could do with a compiler plugin, but there's no reason we couldn't have both.