Nikolai Tillmann

@wsanville is right, this is going to be a bit more complicated... If we leave the current scheme in place, where constant-propagation only rewrites the results, leaving it to LocalDCE...

> What are the criteria for whether a pass is valuable? In general, most passes work towards reducing the final size. Some passes don't do all of the cleanup work...

> Make changes to redex code by adding dex version 37 and disabling the verifier. Redex doesn't support DEX 37. In fact, I just landed a change that adds a...

We don't have plans to support version 37. We investigated, but didn't find that going beyond 35 would provide meaningful benefits, considering both runtime performance and code size.

The dex spec (https://source.android.com/devices/tech/dalvik/dalvik-bytecode) says: > […] invoke-super […] In Dex files prior to version 037, having an interface method_id is illegal and undefined. Redex does not fully support version...

Somehow you seem to have a JSON parser that doesn't like the '#' comments in the default.config file. Can you edit it, and remove '#' and everything that follows in...

> I remove the '#' in the comment, it doesn't work [...] Please try removing the entire comment, not just the leading '#'. The content needs to become legal JSON.

So it seems like you could workaround the first error: ``` [ERROR ] Expecting value: line 9 column 45 (char 212) ``` But what remains is the second error: ```...

https://fbredex.com/docs/proguard contains information on how to pass Proguard rules to Redex.

There is no direct equivalent today in Redex. Couple of thoughts on that topic: - It would be slightly problematic for performance reasons to substitute a method of one class...