Status Update
Comments
sp...@google.com <sp...@google.com>
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #2
I don't think the average developer understands the distinction between method references and method definitions in this context (inside a DEX file). I know I don't.
@jvg, can you elaborate?
an...@google.com <an...@google.com>
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #3
people who are looking at the bytecode in the dex to optimize their app through shrinking hopefully will learn the difference as string tables for method references between various dex files can account for quite a bit of disk space. but more importantly a definition is something you can analyze its code for where a reference you can't so the UI can be confusing without seeing the difference
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #4
How about something like this?
I think having defined members be directly under the class node while references are nested in a group makes more sense.
Also note that the method refs have a
Description
For example this:
seems properly formatted. With
Enable compose formatting for modifiers
this is rewritten to:I can only assume the intention of the option is to chop down modifiers, not any chain of function calls happening in modifier expression? Otherwise the option is hardly useful, I'd expect non-modifier functions to be kept as-is, not chopped down