JDK 11 RFR of 8202334: Update javax.lang.model.util visitors for 11

[Remi Forax]

Hi Joe,
As a side effect, it means that raw string literal will not appear in 11, which is totally fine given a lot of things are still moving.

I've another question, with my ASM hat becaus we have the same issue with ASM API, how do you plan to introduce preview features in the Visitor API ? As a separate interface, as a normal feature, as something else ?

Rémi

----- Mail original -----
> De: "joe darcy" <joe.darcy at oracle.com>
> À: "compiler-dev" <compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Jeudi 26 Avril 2018 19:50:16
> Objet: JDK 11 RFR of 8202334: Update javax.lang.model.util visitors for 11

> Hello,
> 
> Please review the webrev and CSR for 8202334: "Update
> javax.lang.model.util visitors for 11":
> 
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8202334.0/
>     https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202335
> 
> From the CSR:
> 
>> The `javax.lang.model` API was added in Java SE 6. In each of Java SE
>> 7, 8, and 9, new sets of utility visitors were added for each release,
>> for example starting with `AbstractElementVisitor6`, types
>> `AbstractElementVisitor7`, `AbstractElementVisitor8`,
>> `AbstractElementVisitor8` were added in SE 7 and 8, respectively.
>> Similar patterns were followed for `ElementKindVisitor6`, and the rest
>> of the utility visitors.
>>
>> In Java SE 10, there were no language changes requiring new
>> operational behavior from the root visitors. Therefore, rather than
>> introducing yet another slate of visitor classes, the 9-era visitors
>> were updated to indicate they are appropriate for 10 as well
>> (CCC-8193194).
>>
>> In the absence of language changes in 11 which would require new
>> operational behavior from the visitors, the 9-era visitors should be
>> updated to indicate they are appropriate for releases 9 through 11.
>>
>> Solution
>> --------
>> Update the specification and `SupportedSourceVersion` annotations on
>> the 9-era visitor classes to indicate they are appropriate for release 11.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Joe