Question with wildcard types

[José Cornado]

Sorry, I will reconfirm the behavior and make it more readable!


On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar <
vicente.romero at oracle.com> wrote:

>  Hi Jose,
>
> Your query seems to be interesting but it's a little bit messy, could you
> please join the pieces with possibly a small test case that clarifies what
> do you find as a bug or unexpected behavior?
>
> Thanks,
> Vicente
>
>
> On 13/11/13 17:40, José Cornado wrote:
>
> Ok. At the root of everything:
>
>  field.getGenericType() returns a WildcardType with "? super X" instead
> of "? super C" or "? super C<implementorOfanInterface>".
>
> Shouldn't this be a bug since the super clause is expecting an ascendant
> of C?
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:12 AM, José Cornado <jose.cornado at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> please disregard emails. It is user error until further notice! :-}
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:03 AM, José Cornado <jose.cornado at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> wouldn't be more appropriate to return Class C?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:58 AM, José Cornado <jose.cornado at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>>  I have a short question regarding wildcard types:
>>>>
>>>>  public class C<X extends anInterface>{
>>>>
>>>> anotherInterface<? super C<X>> p;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>>  I compile say C<implementorOfanInterface> and I do a getLowerBounds()
>>>> on p's type I get TypeVariable X instead of
>>>> ParameterizedType C<implementorOfanInterface>.
>>>>
>>>>  Is this expected?
>>>>
>>>>  JVM info:
>>>>
>>>>  java version "1.7.0_25"
>>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_25-b15)
>>>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.25-b01, mixed mode)
>>>>
>>>>  on mac os X.
>>>>
>>>>  Thanks a lot!!
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> José Cornado
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> home: http://www.efekctive.com
>>>> blog:   http://blogging.efekctive.com
>>>> ----------------------
>>>>
>>>> Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to
>>>> keep going back and beginning all over again.
>>>>
>>>> Andre Gide
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>> José Cornado
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> home: http://www.efekctive.com
>>> blog:   http://blogging.efekctive.com
>>> ----------------------
>>>
>>> Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to
>>> keep going back and beginning all over again.
>>>
>>> Andre Gide
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>> José Cornado
>>
>> --
>>
>> home: http://www.efekctive.com
>> blog:   http://blogging.efekctive.com
>> ----------------------
>>
>> Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep
>> going back and beginning all over again.
>>
>> Andre Gide
>>
>
>
>
>  --
> José Cornado
>
> --
>
> home: http://www.efekctive.com
> blog:   http://blogging.efekctive.com
> ----------------------
>
> Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep
> going back and beginning all over again.
>
> Andre Gide
>
>
>


-- 
José Cornado

--

home: http://www.efekctive.com
blog:   http://blogging.efekctive.com
----------------------

Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep
going back and beginning all over again.

Andre Gide
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20131115/ab83a008/attachment.html