[foreign] RFR 8221154: jextract should generate java source files

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

Hit send too fast; what about smoke-testing the feature by comparing the 
output against a golden source file?

Maurizio

On 20/03/2019 11:08, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
> Hi,
> looks a solid piece of work! Comments:
>
> 1) In JType there seems to be a dependency on what the sourceSignature 
> method generates and the set of imports generated by the source 
> factory. I wonder if we could make the dependency explicit by adding 
> another virtual method to JType which lists the packages it depends on 
> (so that the source factory can collect them all in a set, and add an 
> import at the end).
>
> 2) In JavaSourceBuilder::addMethod (both variant) shouldn't we use 
> getSourceSignature(TRUE) for the parameter types?
>
> 3) Seems like there's a lot of duplication between the two 
> JavaSourceBuilder::addMethod. The main differences seem to be where 
> the function name comes from and the fact that the tree-based version 
> also has (optional) parameter names; maybe we can rebase both methods 
> on top of a third version which is more low level?
>
> The rest looks good; there's obvious duplication with 
> AsmCodeFactory/Ext, but I think that's mostly by design (e.g. you 
> started from those builders and replaced ASM calls with SourceBuilder 
> calls, which is a fine approach).
>
> Maurizio
>
> On 20/03/2019 10:29, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
>> Please review.
>>
>> This is initial change for moving jextract towards source generation. 
>> The option --src-dump-dir will most likely be changed/removed later. 
>> It is a development/debug option for now. Reasons for source instead 
>> of direct .class generation are documented in the bug report.
>>
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221154
>> Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8221154/webrev.00/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Sundar