RFR JDK-8245842: provide tests for binary compatibility assertions for sealed classes

[Vicente Romero]

Hi,

Thanks for the review,

On 6/17/20 1:01 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Looks good to me.
>
> A slightly different way of handling the test cases, instead of 
> passing in two complete source definitions, would be to pass in a 
> template with a marker string where the sources differ, together with 
> the values to substitute.  This would make it slightly easier to 
> discern the similarities and differences in the source files.

right that could be a future improvement, the door is not closed for 
this test as this part of the record's spec is still being mulled over

>
> Separately, as a separate RFE for toolbox tasks, we might want to add 
> a 'enablePreview' method to the task that cases the right underlying 
> options to be set. This could be a method on AbstractTask, with 
> possible overrides in the specific task classes.  This would make it 
> easier to mark a task as needing preview features, and for the method 
> call to be removed, eventually, when the preview feature becomes 
> standard.

yep this could be done although it won't be a big change compared to the 
current situation I guess

>
> -- Jon

Vicente

>
> On 6/11/20 7:57 AM, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please review fix for [1] at [2], this patch provides test coverage 
>> for Chapter 13 Binary Compatibility of the Sealed Classes spec [3].
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vicente
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8245842
>> [2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8245842/webrev.00/
>> [3] 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/jep360/jep360-20200526/specs/sealed-classes-jls.html