Review request for JDK-8016880: 42 tests in annot102* fail with compile-time errors

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

On 23/07/13 23:07, Eric McCorkle wrote:
> It's the behavior before.  I'll remove the comment.
>
> Any other comments?
Looks good - another groan for AnnotatedType!!

Maurizio
>
> On 07/23/13 17:26, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> The comment on line 48 in the test is confusing.
>>
>> Does "// does not compile" refer to the incorrect behavior before the
>> bug fix, or the behavior after the fix?
>>
>> In general, comments in tests should refer to the intended behavior, and
>> not behavior that may once have been erroneous but which is now fixed.
>>
>> -- Jon
>>
>>
>> On 07/23/2013 01:49 PM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
>>> On 07/23/13 16:35, Alex Buckley wrote:
>>>> Obviously an annotation anywhere in the upper bound of a type parameter
>>>> should be invisible when it comes to using the type variable introduced
>>>> by the type parameter, say in a method signature.
>>>>
>>>> I presume the test expects errors from both the t1 anon.inner class and
>>>> the t2 anon.inner class ?
>>> No.  The test will not compile if type annotations on bounds cause the
>>> parent types to be unequal.  If the test compiles, then javac is doing
>>> what (I believe) it's supposed to do.
>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>> On 7/23/2013 1:15 PM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please review this patch, which fixes some JCK failures related to type
>>>>> annotations.
>>>>>
>>>>> The root cause of these is AnnotatedType, which has been scheduled for
>>>>> replacement.
>>>>>
>>>>> The webrev is here:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~emc/8016880/
>>>>>
>>>>> The bug report is here:
>>>>> http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8016880
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Eric
>>>>>