Bug: Compact record constructor is missing generic type info on parameters

[Archie Cobbs]

Hi Patrick,

If it's just a normal bug, file it at https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/
and it will eventually get triaged over to https://bugs.openjdk.org/

If it's a language question, e.g., a suggestion for some minor improvement,
this list would be appropriate.

-Archie

On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 1:38 PM Patrick Doyle <p.r.doyle at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Is this the wrong place to report bugs like this? What would be the right
> place?
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Patrick Doyle
> p.r.doyle at gmail.com
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 8:52 AM Patrick Doyle <p.r.doyle at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have a JUnit5 test case that demonstrates that if you use the compact
>> constructor syntax in a record, the reflection info will be missing generic
>> type information. Implicit constructors work fine, as do explicit canonical
>> constructors.
>>
>> I found this on Temurin 21.0.2 and the Adoptium project suggested I post
>> here.
>>
>> The unit test can be found in the Adoptium bug report:
>> https://github.com/adoptium/adoptium-support/issues/1025
>>
>> Let me know if there's anything I can do to help.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Patrick Doyle
>> p.r.doyle at gmail.com
>>
>

-- 
Archie L. Cobbs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/amber-dev/attachments/20240423/0a850997/attachment.htm>