-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ArC - producers - change the client proxy class package #22828
Conversation
mkouba
commented
Jan 12, 2022
- use the package of the return type/field type
- previously, the package of the declaring class was used
- resolves IllegalAccessError when using OpenTelemetry extension with custom Resource #22815
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What's the point of havingProducerReturnTypePackagePrivateNoArgsConstructorTest
twice (once in arc and once under extensions)? They seem identical. Did you mean to change the constructor of Resource
in one of them?
DotName typeName = target.kind() == Kind.FIELD ? target.asField().type().name() | ||
: target.asMethod().returnType().name(); | ||
String packageName = DotNames.packageName(typeName); | ||
if (packageName.startsWith("java.")) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I recall in Weld we were replacing a regex of java.*
meaning we'd replace even javax.something
etc. And latest version also does that for jakarta
package but TBF I don't remember why we chose/needed to do that...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TBF I don't remember why we chose/needed to do that...
Exactly. That's the reason why we only keep java.
for now ;-).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, though I also don't understand why the test is needed twice. Probably just to be sure?
Well, one of the tests is most likely redundant. The original idea was to have a test for ArC standalone and one for Quarkus (because of the bytecode transformation and the test classloaders fun). |
I see. In that case it might be worth adding a comment linking them together and mentioning the reason they are duplicated :-) |
- use the package of the return type/field type - previously, the package of the declaring class was used - resolves quarkusio#22815
Done ;-) |
This workflow status is outdated as a new workflow run has been triggered. Failing Jobs - Building 89eba94
Full information is available in the Build summary check run. Failures⚙️ Gradle Tests - JDK 11 #- Failing: integration-tests/gradle
📦 integration-tests/gradle✖
✖
✖
✖
✖
⚙️ Gradle Tests - JDK 11 Windows #- Failing: integration-tests/gradle
📦 integration-tests/gradle✖
✖
✖
✖
✖
⚙️ JVM Tests - JDK 17 #- Failing: integration-tests/grpc-hibernate
📦 integration-tests/grpc-hibernate✖
|
Failing Jobs - Building 89eba94
Full information is available in the Build summary check run. Failures⚙️ Gradle Tests - JDK 11 Windows #- Failing: integration-tests/gradle
📦 integration-tests/gradle✖
|
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828
- and use the produced type to test the app class - follows up on quarkusio#22828