RFR 6388543: improve accuracy of source positions for AnnotationValue param of Messager.printMessage

[Jonathan Gibbons]

reviewed, built, tested and pushed

-- Jon

On 02/06/2017 05:51 PM, Liam Miller-Cushon wrote:
> Thanks for the review! I fixed the nits, here's the latest version:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cushon/6388543/webrev.02/ 
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ecushon/6388543/webrev.02/>
>
> The changeset is attached.
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Jonathan Gibbons 
> <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com <mailto:jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 02/06/2017 10:45 AM, Liam Miller-Cushon wrote:
>>     Hi, have you had a chance to look at the latest version of the
>>     patch?
>>
>>     And would it make sense to defer to 10?
>>
>>     On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Liam Miller-Cushon
>>     <cushon at google.com <mailto:cushon at google.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Jonathan Gibbons
>>         <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com
>>         <mailto:jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             Is there any good reason not to do so?
>>
>>
>>         I don't think so, thanks. I had thought that it would add
>>         implementation complexity and wasn't as obviously useful as
>>         supporting top-level and array elements values. However I
>>         realized that matchAnnoToTree can be generalized to search
>>         recursively for values, so it ends up being simpler. And as
>>         you point out, it offers the best flexibility.
>>
>>         I have uploaded a new version of the patch that searches
>>         recursively:
>>         http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cushon/6388543/webrev.01/
>>         <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ecushon/6388543/webrev.01/>
>>
>>
>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cushon/6388543/webrev.01/test/tools/javac/processing/messager/6388543/T6388543.java.html
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ecushon/6388543/webrev.01/test/tools/javac/processing/messager/6388543/T6388543.java.html>
>     Nit: in the @modules, you don't need to specify java.compiler as
>     well as jdk.compiler, since the latter requires the former.
>     Nit: it is not common to see javax.* imports sorted before java.*
>     imports.
>
>     Otherwise, looks OK.
>
>     I think this is small and safe enough for 9.
>
>     -- Jon
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20170206/5343e3b4/attachment.html>