Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in
Please join us on
Visual Studio Developer Community and in the
Mono organizations on
GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain
available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work
on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations
as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related
Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug
tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we
make these adjustments and improvements for the future.
Please create a new report on
Developer Community or GitHub with
your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error
messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to
this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.
Parameters are named p0, p1, etc. instead. It's possible to get the real names because Java decompilers such as http://jd.benow.ca/ can do it.
- It is NOT possible because there is no parameter names stored in .class files.
- It IS possible to give parameter names if you either specify API references in standard Javadoc (Java6 or Java7, probably Java8 too) format or droiddoc (Android document) format, as <JavaDocPaths>, <Java7DocPaths> or <DroidDocPaths> custom project property in .csproj or .fsproj files.
It may not ALWAYS be possible but it IS. Download https://github.com/radiumone/r1-connect-demo-Android/blob/master/SdkLib/LibR1Connect.jar, and either open it with either the decompiler I've pointed to or unpack it and open com/radiumone/emitter/R1Emitter.class. The names are clearly visible.
There is no publicly usable Java library that retrieves parameter names (asm 5.0.3 doesn't work for this library). Unless there is opensource Java library that makes it usable, it is not going to be supported.
This decompiler - https://bitbucket.org/mstrobel/procyon/wiki/Java%20Decompiler - is open source and it also detects the parameter names.
So, given that there is an open source library, will this bug be fixed? I don't agree it's a low priority. If a JAR is not documented, it's impossible to deduce what to pass looking at p0, p1.
Incorporating that decompiler is a lot of changes so that won't happen in a few weeks. We likely have somewhat different binding toolchains which is in much higher priority after the next major version. Parameter name retrieval will be discussed within that timeframe.
This reply sound much better, thank you. I'd only like to ask you to reconsider about the priority of this issue. I wish you a pleasant evening.
Hello, any plans on this one? I don't agree it's a low priority, having the real parameter names makes the bindings much more intuitive.
We have a new tool called class-parse which we are switching over too to generate the bindings. If the .class files contain debug symbols it will be able to pull out the parameter names more accurately than the nav tooling we have now.
It is already implemented and enabled in our master build, no need to keep it open.