Less useful than ByteMod

[PELock]

It's less useful than bytemod, I cannot even edit the bytecode (I can only delete and insert instructions), how is that an usability improvement?

Also code is hidden and I need to click many times to get into it (why did you burry it like that?).

Add functions in the left tree panel, open code on click.

Add option to display decompiled code in 3rd panel, next to the opcodes panel and refresh it on every change.

Think about option to modify Java code by compiling actual Java code like it's done in .net dnSpy decompiler (take a look at its design, it's really good).

[GraxCode]

I think you didn't understand the structure of Cafebabe. The node list is in a separate frame, while you can edit the instructions in the main frame, without right clicking on them. I will note your suggestions, but I probably wont implement java compilation. Cafebabe is a bytecode editor, not a compiler. I don't know if live decompilation is feasible, as it would take long on bigger bytecode and therefore produce lag.

[Col-E]

If you want to support recompile-decompile there are other tools that support that. Grax is right on the scope issue. Adding a compiler can be a pain on multiple levels.

1. Users don't understand why the compiler doesn't work due to their own configuration problems on their machine (Like not having the java-compiler installed.)
2. It is used as a crutch and you end up having to support a javac front end moreso than the bytecode editor aspect (up to author preference, they may not see this as a negative)

Anyways, I do think it is relevant to note the other UX improvements Cafebabe has over Bytemod.