Mixins cannot target a package-private class or protected inner class about mixin HOT 8 CLOSED

Honestly, this seems like the best way to approach this.

from mixin.

Since it's the one outstanding issue but nobody's commented, I was thinking of just either going ahead with this plan or just closing the issue until an actual use-case appeared and I got bugged into adding something like this anyway.

The two choices for implementation basically are:

• Add an extra array of strings to the @Mixin annotation
• Add an alternate version of @Mixin (eg. @PrivateMixin) which is identical in every way but just takes strings instead of class references.

from mixin.

Would PrivateMixin error if a mixin could have been used instead?

from mixin.

That would make sense.

from mixin.

I think a String[] targets() would be fine here, unless private-class specific parameters are needed there's not much reason to use another annotation.

from mixin.

No particular reason, and programmatically it makes no odds either way, the complexity is pretty much exactly equal whether it's an extra property or an extra annotation.

Really it's just nicer that the value property is default if no other properties are specified and just leads to the slightly nicer

@PrivateMixin("some.target.Clazz")
public abstract class SomeClazzMixin {

versus

@Mixin(targets = "some.target.Clazz")
public abstract class SomeClazzMixin {

So there's that. Basically since annotation properties when being parsed with ASM or AP are all dynamic lookups anyway, it doesn't really make any odds either way since neither code will actually care what the actual annotation passed in is, as long as it has the relevant keys.

from mixin.

Lets go with option 2 for the sake of the users

@Mixin(targets = "some.target.Clazz")
public abstract class SomeClazzMixin {

from mixin.

Alrighty then!

from mixin.