RFR: JDK-8236692: static final fields without initializer are accepted by javac

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

The Flow patch looks great and it brings back some sanity into the code 
- after all adding the special case for compact constructor is not so 
bad, and is now called out in its own special case, which makes the code 
more readable.

On the test - I'm not sure, why is the test source defined in two 
strings - as in

"record R() { # }", "static final String x;"

Doesn't this mean the second string will be replaced for the "#" ? But 
since there's only one string, why having the replacement at all? I 
noted this idiom in most of the negative tests.

Maurizio

On 08/01/2020 03:39, Vicente Romero wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have updated the patch after an offline review with Maurizio, 
> basically I have rewritten how Flow deals with the compact constructor 
> to isolate it as a special case. The new iteration is at [1]. I have 
> basically restored the original code for method checkInit and added a 
> special case for the compact constructor.
>
> Thanks,
> Vicente
>
> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8236692/webrev.01/
>
> On 1/7/20 3:18 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Please review the fix for [1] at [2], javac was failing to issue an 
>> error for code like:
>>
>> record R() {
>>     public static final int X;
>> }
>>
>> even though `X` was not initialized as the automatic code to generate 
>> initializer expressions only apply to the fields generated from the 
>> record component. The patch updates the code in Flow that analyzes 
>> compact constructors to don't bail out if the variable being analyzed 
>> is static.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vicente
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8236692
>> [2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8236692/webrev.00/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20200108/203dfc9d/attachment.htm>