<Beans Dev> [9] Review Request: 8156043 Unstable behavior of PropertyDescriptor's getWriteMethod() in case of overloaded setters

Thu May 26 16:48:28 UTC 2016

On 26.05.16 19:26, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
> The thing is that you are making decision, which method to discard, at
> the moment you analyze a particular type within the class hierarchy. But
> this cannot be correct regardless which filter is used for
> Class.getMethods() the random or alphabetical. The correct decision may
> be only made at the moment you have collected methods from all types of
> the hierarchy that is subject for introspection. Otherwise you always
> has probability to discard methods that may be finally needed to create
> the correct property descriptors of the selected properties, also the
> property selection itself may be wrong if it is done without all
> available methods.

The current decision is correct and works according the specification, 
if the code contains the properties which contradicts each other we can 
select any of them, because this behavior is unspecified, it does not 
matter are mislead properties comes from one class or from some other 
parent class. Currently for each class we generate the list of 
properties and then merge each property if subclass provide an extension 
of this property.

> I think the JDK-8157828 issue you've created is about the same problem
> as the issue you are trying to fix here. It seems it cannot be solved on
> the Class.getMethods() level, it should be solved in the introspector
> itself.

That's the separate bug, this one is about "Unstable behavior of 
PropertyDescriptor's getWriteMethod() in case of overloaded setters" and 
the root cause here is that the same code which is executed on a 
different systems behave differently. After the fix in all cases the 
same code will work unconditionally from the system where it is 
executed. Do you have an objections that the change is not fix this 
instability?

>>> And why it is not discarded if I change SUB.setFoo(Integer) to
>>> SUB.setFoo(String) for example? That seems very odd.
>>
>> I assume because in this case instead of foo=int we will select
>> foo=long and will skip foo=String.
>>
>>>
>>> And before your fix there was no such behavior. You wrote that it was
>>> random before the fix, but I ran the test may times and could not get
>>> the same effect.
>>> So I suppose it was introduced by the fix.
>>
>> It means that when you run the app Class.getMethods() always return
>> the same order of methods. You can add a logging to the test attached
>> to the fix and run it on current jdk9, you will see that the type of
>> foo property is different time to time.
>>
>>>
>>> Also there is yet another problem here. The default interface methods
>>> are totally ignored. This is probably a separate issue.
>>
>> This is a known bug:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139193
>>
>>>
>>> --Semyon
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, the method may return any of this two (also a secondary
>>>>> rank could be used), but not a mixture of them in any circumstances.
>>>>>
>>>>> --Semyon
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In my understanding, if I override the setter I should get the
>>>>>>>>> over-ridden method for the top level class introspection.
>>>>>>>>> Otherwise
>>>>>>>>> I do
>>>>>>>>> not understand for what such introspector can be used:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have some object which property I want to set, but using the
>>>>>>>>> introspector for that I'm calling a wrong method which breaks the
>>>>>>>>> inheritance and so corrupts the object state.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And moreover, if I reverse the situation and override the
>>>>>>>>> getter in
>>>>>>>>> Sub
>>>>>>>>> instead of setter :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> class Super {
>>>>>>>>>     public void setFoo(Long i) {}
>>>>>>>>>     public Long getFoo() {return null;}
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> class Sub extends Super {
>>>>>>>>>     public Long getFoo() {return null;}
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the introspector returns the over-ridden getter method for the
>>>>>>>>> property :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> type: class java.lang.Long
>>>>>>>>> getter: public java.lang.Long Sub.getFoo()
>>>>>>>>> setter: public void Super.setFoo(java.lang.Long)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This looks inconsistent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --Semyon
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/25/2016 2:14 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25.05.16 11:38, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this case the type of foo property will be Enum, before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fix. But the write method will be found only if this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> method is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> added to Sub, in other case the write method is recognized
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remove all duplicates of set(xxx). Not sure is it intended
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jdk9 to skip such writers or not. I will file CR for that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That maybe an another issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I dig to the history and found that it was done intentionally
>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>> JavaBean jep was implemented. but I filed
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8157828 for additional
>>>>>>>>>>>> investigation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But the current fix need to be checked by
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the scenario when there are several getters (over-ridden with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> return
>>>>>>>>>>>>> type substitutability) in addition to the setters.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tescase is updated, the case: getE + multiple setE is added:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8156043/webrev.01/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/17/2016 3:20 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the fix for jdk9.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have a number of bugs which state that our JavaBeans
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> randomly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not work, examples: JDK-6807471[1] , JDK-6788525[2], the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reason is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the order of methods from Class.getMethods() is not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specified.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I propose to fix this bug totally and sort the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> methods in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order. Note that the resulted list is cached, and we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sort the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only the once.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The code partly was copied from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.MethodOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3], but the parameters check and the order for return
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> values
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changed. After this fix our bugs(if any) can be easily
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reproduced.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6807471
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6788525
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/file/fb38b0925915/src/java.management/share/classes/com/sun/jmx/mbeanserver/MBeanAnalyzer.java
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8156043
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Webrev can be found at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8156043/webrev.00
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
Best regards, Sergey.