Replies: 4 comments
-
After further research, One remaining hurdle is how to pass the source method name to the target. When using |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I think you can add |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@raphw I thought I had already added the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@raphw Indeed, the @RuntimeType annotation does the trick. Thank you. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
UPDATE: The problem has been simplified to providing the source method name to the target of
MethodCall
(see comment below)UPDATE 2: I have reverted to trying to use
MethodDelegation
instead ofMethodCall
. Moreover, using@Pipe
annotation seems to make a difference. See thevehicle2
package in the project. It looks like I have found a working solution to my problem.Hello,
I am trying to put in place support for API extensions via user defined interfaces.
The source code for the problem at hand can be found at https://github.com/ceki/vehicle
Running the VehicleMain results in a
IllegalArgumentException
(see below).However, the
IllegalArgumentException
disappears if the return type of generate method inTigthenBoltsGenerator
is changed from<E extends Engine>
toUserDefinedEngine
.How can I convince ByteBuddy that the generate method is compatible with
ch.qos.vehicle.UserDefinedEngine.tightenBolts()
even if the return values do not match exactly?Here is the exception:
Can you point me in the right direction please?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions