Changes in constructor visibility breaking gwt build.

[DaanVanYperen]

Some visibility changes are making my GWT build fail. Which may or may not be caused by me possibly needing some more sleep.

  [ERROR] Errors in 'E:\GitHub\arktrail\html\build\gwt\gen\com\artemis\gwtref\client\IReflectionCacheGenerated.java'
     [WARN] Line 8660: Referencing deprecated method 'com.artemis.systems.DelayedEntityProcessingSystem.restart'
     [ERROR] Line 8129: The constructor ComponentManager(int) is not visible
     [ERROR] Line 8178: The constructor ComponentType(Class<? extends Component>, int) is not visible
     [ERROR] Line 8268: The constructor EntityManager(int) is not visible

It's generating code like this in the generated reflection cache.

    private static com.artemis.EntityManager m106(int p0) {
  return new com.artemis.EntityManager(p0);
  }

If anyone can verify it's GWT that's broken and not me I can put some time in expanding the reflection generator. ;)

[junkdog]

I'll look into this tomorrow - i know i've broken some stuff with recent commits; it should mostly be a matter of copy-pasting the affected classes

• putting them in gwt/emu and increasing visibility where it bails (ie; still get proper encapsulation while developing and keeeping gwt happy). On Sep 11, 2014 9:19 PM, "Daan van Yperen" notifications@github.com wrote:

Some visibility changes are making my GWT build fail. Which may or may not be caused by me possibly needing some more sleep.

[ERROR] Errors in 'E:\GitHub\arktrail\html\build\gwt\gen\com\artemis\gwtref\client\IReflectionCacheGenerated.java' [WARN] Line 8660: Referencing deprecated method 'com.artemis.systems.DelayedEntityProcessingSystem.restart' [ERROR] Line 8129: The constructor ComponentManager(int) is not visible [ERROR] Line 8178: The constructor ComponentType(Class<? extends Component>, int) is not visible [ERROR] Line 8268: The constructor EntityManager(int) is not visible

It's generating code like this in the generated reflection cache.

private static com.artemis.EntityManager m106(int p0) {

return new com.artemis.EntityManager(p0); }

Anyone else having GWT issues?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/junkdog/artemis-odb/issues/137.

[DaanVanYperen]

Spotted this in the GDX reflection fork: https://github.com/libgdx/libgdx/commit/0e8fc838d576af722eaa1f37b9d32d8049138566 -

• create constructors only for public classes
• access protected constructors by using an anonymous class

Might be more worth porting: https://github.com/libgdx/libgdx/commits/master/backends/gdx-backends-gwt/src/com/badlogic/gwtref/gen/ReflectionCacheSourceCreator.java

Edit: Would save you the headache maintaining multiple versions.

[DaanVanYperen]

I'll apply the fix on my fork, unless you happen to be working on it right now!

[junkdog]

No, go right ahead! You have commit rights to main repo btw.

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Daan van Yperen notifications@github.com wrote:

I'll apply the fix on my fork, unless you happen to be working on it right now!

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/junkdog/artemis-odb/issues/137#issuecomment-55379089.

[DaanVanYperen]

That's madness! Why would you do that! I could be a serial killer.

[junkdog]

I feared someone would murder me during my vacation.

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Daan van Yperen notifications@github.com wrote:

That's madness! Why would you do that! I could be a serial killer.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/junkdog/artemis-odb/issues/137#issuecomment-55379706.

[DaanVanYperen]

I might murder gwt, it's giving me a headache.

[junkdog]

Couldn't one just replace the offending files, opening up the constructors? Like in ComponentType, which has a more restrictive constructor in non-emulated artemis.

[DaanVanYperen]

My headache involved exactly that file. Wasn't aware of the emu version so I kept running into a missing field error when it clearly existed! (I thought it was some reserved name or visibility issue, derp.).

Got it all worked out now though. XD

[junkdog]

My headache involved exactly that file. Wasn't aware of the emu version so I kept running into a missing field error when it clearly existed! (I thought it was some reserved name or visibility issue, derp.).

Ouch, I was thinking before about having some fail-safe in place against files diverging (rather being left behind): I'm not sure such a tool/plugin is available, but it could be something as simple as linking hashes between emulated-original.

edit: if it's implemented as a maven plugin, the plugin could abort compilation when it notices that the emulated md5 (or whatever) doesn't match the expected checksum in artemis.

[DaanVanYperen]

This was developer error on my part. The ported tests should make you aware of any issues anyway!