Where does bytecode injection happen? - annotations

Motivation
I have a SomeObject.java file:
class SomeObject {
String name;
}
Compiling it creates a bytecode-containing SomeObject.class file.
0xCAFEBABE...
If we use SomeObject on the JVM, it is loaded by the current classloader and all works fine.
Now let's assume that I'd like to have some dynamic code generation. I can write my custom annotation
#Target(ElementType.TYPE)
public #interface Data {
...
}
and add it as a modifier to the class declaration:
#Data
class SomeObject {
String name;
}
I can also retain it for the runtime with #Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME):
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target(ElementType.TYPE)
public #interface Data {
...
}
Question
Where are annotations used for bytecode injection? Does a classloader inject bytecode when loading the class with the appropriate runtime retained annotation like in this figure:
source -(compile)-> bytecode -(classloader bytecode injection)-> injected bytecode -(classloading)-> JVM loaded bytecode

Yes, it would be possible to have your custom classloader to load a class and through bytecode manipulation tools such as Javassist or ASM perform the modifications, loading into memory not the bytecode in the class file but rather the modified one.
Although there are easier (and better, in my opinion) ways of doing it.
Annotation Processor Tool (APT)
Since Java 6 you have APT which allows you to hook into the compiling process (via -processor argument in javac). With APT you have access to the code's AST (Abstract Syntax Tree) and you can perform modifications directly when compiling using the javax.lang.model. This means that your class file will be generated with the needed modifications.
In this case the chain would be something like something like:
source -(compile and performs modifications at model level)-> bytecode already modified - regular class loader -> loads class into memory
Post-Compiling processing
Another approach which can be used is to perform bytecode injection after compilation as a post-compiling process. In this cases you use bytecode modification tools (once again javassist, asm, among others), which can perform the modifications you need when the desired annotation is found, generating a new class file with the injected bytecode.
In such case your chain would be:
source -compile -> bytecode -post-compile-> modified bytecode - regular class loader -> loads class into memory
Runtime modifications
Finally we reach runtime bytecode modifications. Even though your idea is possible, in my opinion I would leave the class loader magic and use tools such has Javassist that also allows you to have dynamic proxies which can be modified and reloaded.
In javassist particular case the chain would be
source -compile -> bytecode -post-compile-> modified bytecode - regular class loader -> loaded into memory - javassist proxy -> modified class - javassist hot swapper -> re-modified class
Proxies aren't perfect though (well nothing is). You'll have a performance hit and you won't be able to modify the public interface of your class (sidenote: both APT and post-compile process can allow you to modify the class public interface). I could go on a bit more on this, but I think this is already enough information to give you food for thought. Feel free to leave a comment if you need additional information.

Related

Breakpoints in Provides method get remapped in Eclipse to ProvidesAdapter instead

I am having an issue in Eclipse (with Dagger 1 still).
In dagger, for dependency injection (javax.inject), you create a Module class, with provides methods, like this:
#dagger.Module
class FooModule {
#dagger.Provides
Something provideSomething() {
return new Something();
}
}
And this will generate a class (using annotation processing) called FooModule$$ModuleAdapter$ProvideSomethingProvidesAdapter.
If I set a breakpoint in a provideSomething method in FooModule class (my code), Eclipse almost always actually stops on that same line number in the FooModule$$ModuleAdapter$ProvideSomethingProvidesAdapter class instead.
Does anyone know how to avoid this problem? I suspect this is likely an Eclipse issue where it is somehow is mapping the generated file to what it thinks is the "source" file, but that's of course not what I want.
Is there perhaps some setting in eclipse to avoid this problem?

Is it possible to use CDI interceptor to intercept method invocation from an Entity?

Team lead wants to writing some business methods inside of Entity class, such as following:
#Entity
public class SomeProcess extends SomeProcessBase implements Serializable {
#SomeInterceptor
public void start() {
//do some business logics
}
#SomeInterceptor
public void abort() {
// do some business logics
}
...
}
Can we use CDI interceptor mechanism to intercept non-contextual entity objects?
The answer is NO.
And the next direction for this is moving to BCEL.
After a few days study, i finally finished with BCEL to achieve method intercepting.
Rough Solution:
1. Using java instrument framework to transform byte code at class load time. Click Reference.
2. Transform byte code with a bytecode manipulation lib, such as ASM, Javassist, or BCEL. While transforming bytecode, manually writing target java file, and using some tool class provided by those libs to generate java code which can create byte codes from the target class file, after some encapsulation and boxing-and-unboxing and etc, then transform byte code part would be ready. BCEL provides BCELifier class to generate those java code, and the bytecode manipulation also mentioned some other tools for the other libs.
3. Try Lifecycle open source project on github.com, which provides Java based Lifecycle description language, it's kind of using Java to describe UML state machine with meta-driven style. And for method intercepting, please refer to BCELClassFileTransformer.java
4. Contact me for more help.

How to use GWT SerializationStreamFactory

I am trying to serialize a object in GWT using SerializationFactory, but I am not able to get it working. Here is the sample code of my POC:
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationException;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationStreamFactory;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationStreamReader;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationStreamWriter;
...........
Some code here....
.........
......
SerializationStreamFactory factory = (SerializationStreamFactory) GWT.create(MyClass.class);
SerializationStreamWriter writer = factory.createStreamWriter();
try {
writer.writeObject(new MyClass("anirudh"));
String value = writer.toString();
SerializationStreamReader reader = factory.createStreamReader(value);
MyClass myObj = (MyClass) reader.readObject();
System.out.println(myObj.getName());
} catch (SerializationException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
It gave me the following exception
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: Deferred binding failed for 'com.anirudh..client.MyClass' (did you forget to inherit a required module?)
also in my code the class whose object I am trying to serialize implements IsSerializable
MyClass implements IsSerializable
I don't want to use GWT Auto-Bean framework because it does not fit my use case. Also I am not using GWT-RPC framework and right now I am quite adamant about using SerializationStreamFactory :D because I seriously want to know how this thing works.
Can anyone share a working example of SerializationStreamFactory or help me out pointing any mistake(s) I did.
Thanks in advance
SerializationStreamFactory factory = (SerializationStreamFactory) GWT.create(MyClass.class);
What are you expecting this line to do? GWT will attempt to find a replace-with or generate-with rule that matches this class (either when-type-assignable or when-type-is), or failing that will attempt to invoke a zero-arg constructor on MyClass, effectively new MyClass(). Is this what you are expecting?
The selected exception you've pasted suggests that MyClass may not be on the source path that GWT has been given to compile from, but the full error log will provide more information.
It looks as though you are trying to mimic the generated RPC code, where a *Async rpc interface would be implemented by code that extends from com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.impl.RemoteServiceProxy (which implements SerializationStreamFactory). That base implementation is extended further to initialize several fields such as the com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.impl.Serializer instance, actually responsible for serializing and deserializing object streams.
Serializers are created (by default) from the base class of com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.impl.SerializerBase, through the rebind class com.google.gwt.user.rebind.rpc.TypeSerializerCreator. If you've build your own generator for MyClass, you should be kicking this off to get the work done as ProxyCreator already should be doing.
Remember when building your own serialization/deserialization mechanism that you need to decide which types can be marshalled within this system - if you open it to all types, then you will need to generate FieldSerializer types for all possible objects on the source path. This will greatly expand the size of your compiled code.
If your main goal is learning how this 'magic' works, dig into the generators and associated code that live in the com.google.gwt.user.rebind.rpc package. There are other libraries that leverage these ideas such as the gwt-atmosphere project (see https://github.com/Atmosphere/atmosphere to get started). Also review the generated code that GWT creates when it builds a 'tradition' RPC interface.

How to use OSGi getServiceReference() right

I am new to OSGi and came across several examples about OSGi services.
For example:
import org.osgi.framework.*;
import org.osgi.service.log.*;
public class MyActivator implements BundleActivator {
public void start(BundleContext context) throws Exception {
ServiceReference logRef =
context.getServiceReference(LogService.class.getName());
}
}
My question is, why do you use
getServiceReference(LogService.class.getName())
instead of
getServiceReference("LogService")
If you use LogService.class.getName() you have to import the Interface. This also means that you have to import the package org.osgi.services.log in your MANIFEST.MF.
Isn't that completely counterproductive if you want to reduce dependencies to push loose coupling? As far as I know one advantage of services is that the service consumer doesn't have to know the service publisher. But if you have to import one specific Interface you clearly have to know who's providing it. By only using a string like "LogService" you would not have to know that the Interface is provided by org.osgi.services.log.LogService.
What am I missing here?
Looks like you've confused implementation and interface
Using the actual interface for the name (and importing the interface , which you'll end up doing anyway) reenforces the interface contract that services are designed around. You don't care about the implemenation of a LogService but you do care about the interface. Every LogService will need to implement the same interface, hence your use of the interface to get the service. For all you know the LogService is really a wrapper around SLF4J provided by some other bundle. All you see is the interface. That's the loose coupling you're looking for. You don't have to ship the interface with every implementation. Leave the interface it's own bundle and have multiple implementations of that interface.
Side note: ServiceTracker is usually easier to use, give it a try!
Added benefits: Using the interface get the class name avoids spelling mistakes, excessive string literals, and makes refactoring much easier.
After you've gotten the ServiceReference, your next couple lines will likely involve this:
Object logSvc = content.getService(logRef)
// What can you do with logSvc now?!? It's an object, mostly useless
// Cast to the interface ... YES! Now you need to import it!
LogSerivce logger = (LogService)logSvc;
logger.log(LogService.LOG_INFO, "Interfaces are a contract between implementation and consumer/user");
If you use the LogService, you're coupled to it anyway. If you write middleware you likely get the name parameterized through some XML file or via an API. And yes, "LogService" will fail terribly, you need to use the fully qualified name: "org.osgi.service.log.LogService". Main reason to use the LogService.class.getName() pattern is to get correct renaming when you refactor your code and minimize spelling errors. The next OSGi API will very likely have:
ServiceReference<S> getServiceReference(Class<S> type)
calls to increase type safety.
Anyway, I would never use these low level API unless you develop middleware. If you actually depend on a concrete class DS is infinitely simpler, and even more when you use it with the bnd annotations (http://enroute.osgi.org/doc/217-ds.html).
#Component
class Xyz implements SomeService {
LogService log;
#Reference
void setLog( LogService log) { this.log = log; }
public void foo() { ... someservice ... }
}
If you develop middleware you get the service classes usually without knowing the actual class, via a string or class object. The OSGi API based on strings is used in those cases because it allows us to be more lazy by not creating a class loader until the last moment in time. I think the biggest mistake we made in OSGi 12 years ago is not to include the DS concepts in the core ... :-(
You cannot use value "LogService"
as a class name to get ServiceReference, because you have to use fully qualified class name
"org.osgi.services.log.LogService".
If you import package this way:
org.osgi.services.log;resolution:=optional
and you use ServiceTracker to track services in BundleActivator.start() method I suggest to use "org.osgi.services.log.LogService" instead of LogService.class.getName() on ServiceTracker initializazion. In this case you'll not get NoClassDefFoundError/ClassNotFountException on bundle start.
As basszero mentioned you should consider to use ServiceTracker. It is fairly easy to use and also supports a much better programming pattern. You must never assume that a ServiceReference you got sometime in the past is still valid. The service the ServiceReference points to might have gone away. The ServiceTracker will automatically notify you when a service is registered or unregistered.

GWT Dynamic loading using GWT.create() with String literals instead of Class literals

GWT.create() is the reflection equivalent in GWT,
But it take only class literals, not fully qualified String for the Class name.
How do i dynamically create classes with Strings using GWT.create()?
Its not possible according to many GWT forum posts but how is it being done in frameworks like Rocket-GWT (http://code.google.com/p/rocket-gwt/wiki/Ioc) and Gwittir (http://code.google.com/p/gwittir/wiki/Introspection)
It is possible, albeit tricky. Here are the gory details:
If you only think as GWT as a straight Java to JS, it would not work. However, if you consider Generators - Special classes with your GWT compiler Compiles and Executes during compilation, it is possible. Thus, you can generate java source while even compiling.
I had this need today - Our system deals with Dynamic resources off a Service, ending into a String and a need for a class. Here is the solutuion I've came up with - btw, it works under hosted, IE and Firefox.
Create a GWT Module declaring:
A source path
A Generator (which should be kept OUTSIDE the package of the GWT Module source path)
An interface replacement (it will inject the Generated class instead of the interface)
Inside that package, create a Marker interface (i call that Constructable). The Generator will lookup for that Marker
Create a base abstract class to hold that factory. I do this in order to ease on the generated source code
Declare that module inheriting on your Application.gwt.xml
Some notes:
Key to understanding is around the concept of generators;
In order to ease, the Abstract base class came in handy.
Also, understand that there is name mandling into the generated .js source and even the generated Java source
Remember the Generator outputs java files
GWT.create needs some reference to the .class file. Your generator output might do that, as long as it is referenced somehow from your application (check Application.gwt.xml inherits your module, which also replaces an interface with the generator your Application.gwt.xml declares)
Wrap the GWT.create call inside a factory method/singleton, and also under GWT.isClient()
It is a very good idea to also wrap your code-class-loading-calls around a GWT.runAsync, as it might need to trigger a module load. This is VERY important.
I hope to post the source code soon. Cross your fingers. :)
Brian,
The problem is GWT.create doen't know how to pick up the right implementation for your abstract class
I had the similar problem with the new GWT MVP coding style
( see GWT MVP documentation )
When I called:
ClientFactory clientFactory = GWT.create(ClientFactory.class);
I was getting the same error:
Deferred binding result type 'com.test.mywebapp.client.ClientFactory' should not be abstract
All I had to do was to go add the following lines to my MyWebapp.gwt.xml file:
<!-- Use ClientFactoryImpl by default -->
<replace-with class="com.test.mywebapp.client.ClientFactoryImpl">
<when-type-is class="com.test.mywebapp.client.ClientFactory"/>
</replace-with>
Then it works like a charm
I ran into this today and figured out a solution. The questioner is essentially wanting to write a method such as:
public <T extends MyInterface> T create(Class<T> clz) {
return (T)GWT.create(clz);
}
Here MyInterface is simply a marker interface to define the range of classes I want to be able to dynamically generate. If you try to code the above, you will get an error. The trick is to define an "instantiator" such as:
public interface Instantiator {
public <T extends MyInterface> T create(Class<T> clz);
}
Now define a GWT deferred binding generator that returns an instance of the above. In the generator, query the TypeOracle to get all types of MyInterface and generate implementations for them just as you would for any other type:
e.g:
public class InstantiatorGenerator extends Generator {
public String generate(...) {
TypeOracle typeOracle = context.getTypeOracle();
JClassType myTYpe= typeOracle.findType(MyInterface.class.getName());
JClassType[] types = typeOracle.getTypes();
List<JClassType> myInterfaceTypes = Collections.createArrayList();
// Collect all my interface types.
for (JClassType type : types) {
if (type.isInterface() != null && type.isAssignableTo(myType)
&& type.equals(myType) == false) {
myInterfaceTypes.add(type);
}
for (JClassType nestedType : type.getNestedTypes()) {
if (nestedType.isInterface() != null && nestedType.isAssignableTo(myType)
&& nestedType.equals(myTYpe) == false) {
myInterfaceTypes.add(nestedType);
}
}
}
for (JClassType jClassType : myInterfaceTypes) {
MyInterfaceGenerator generator = new MyInterfaceGenerator();
generator.generate(logger, context, jClassType.getQualifiedSourceName());
}
}
// Other instantiator generation code for if () else if () .. constructs as
// explained below.
}
The MyIntefaceGenerator class is just like any other deferred binding generator. Except you call it directly within the above generator instead of via GWT.create. Once the generation of all known sub-types of MyInterface is done (when generating sub-types of MyInterface in the generator, make sure to make the classname have a unique pattern, such as MyInterface.class.getName() + "_MySpecialImpl"), simply create the Instantiator by again iterating through all known subtypes of MyInterface and creating a bunch of
if (clz.getName().equals(MySpecialDerivativeOfMyInterface)) { return (T) new MySpecialDerivativeOfMyInterface_MySpecialImpl();}
style of code. Lastly throw an exception so you can return a value in all cases.
Now where you'd call GWT.create(clz); instead do the following:
private static final Instantiator instantiator = GWT.create(Instantiator.class);
...
return instantiator.create(clz);
Also note that in your GWT module xml, you'll only define a generator for Instantiator, not for MyInterface generators:
<generate-with class="package.rebind.InstantiatorGenerator">
<when-type-assignable class="package.impl.Instantiator" />
</generate-with>
Bingo!
What exactly is the question - i am guessing you wish to pass parameters in addition to the class literal to a generator.
As you probably already know the class literal passed to GWT.create() is mostly a selector so that GWT can pick and execute a generator which in the end spits out a class. The easist way to pass a parameter to the generator is to use annotations in an interface and pass the interface.class to GWT.create(). Note of course the interface/class must extend the class literal passed into GWT.create().
class Selector{
}
#Annotation("string parameter...")
class WithParameter extends Selector{}
Selector instance = GWT.create( WithParameter.class )
Everything is possible..although may be difficult or even useless. As Jan has mentioned you should use a generator to do that. Basically you can create your interface the generator code which takes that interface and compile at creation time and gives you back the instance. An example could be:
//A marker interface
public interface Instantiable {
}
//What you will put in GWT.create
public interface ReflectionService {
public Instantiable newInstance(String className);
}
//gwt.xml, basically when GWT.create finds reflectionservice, use reflection generator
<generate-with class="...ReflectionGenerator" >
<when-type-assignable class="...ReflectionService" />
</generate-with>
//In not a client package
public class ReflectionGenerator extends Generator{
...
}
//A class you may instantiate
public class foo implements Instantiable{
}
//And in this way
ReflectionService service = GWT.create(ReflectionService.class);
service.newInstance("foo");
All you need to know is how to do the generator. I may tell you that at the end what you do in the generator is to create Java code in this fashion:
if ("clase1".equals(className)) return new clase1();
else if ("clase2".equals(className)) return new clase2();
...
At the final I thought, common I can do that by hand in a kind of InstanceFactory...
Best Regards
I was able to do what I think you're trying to do which is load a class and bind it to an event dynamically; I used a Generator to dynamically link the class to the event. I don't recommend it but here's an example if it helps:
http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2010/a-simple-gwt-generator-example/
Not having looked through the code of rocket/gwittir (which you ought to do if you want to find out how they did it, it is opensource after all), i can only guess that they employ deferred binding in such a way that during compile time, they work out all calls to reflection, and statically generate all the code required to implement those call. So during run-time, you cant do different ones.
What you're trying to do is not possible in GWT.
While GWT does a good job of emulating Java at compile time the runtime is of course completely different. Most reflection is unsupported and it is not possible to generate or dynamically load classes at runtime.
I had a brief look into code for Gwittir and I think they are doing their "reflection stuff" at compile time. Here: http://code.google.com/p/gwittir/source/browse/trunk/gwittir-core/src/main/java/com/totsp/gwittir/rebind/beans/IntrospectorGenerator.java
You might be able to avoid the whole issue by doing it on the server side. Say with a service
witch takes String and returns some sort of a serializable super type.
On the server side you can do
return (MySerializableType)Class.forName("className").newInstance();
Depending on your circumstances it might not be a big performance bottleneck.