Javac not trying to recover unresolved parameterized types

[Mickael Istria]

OK, thank you.
Should I open such issue through https://bugreport.java.com/bugreport/ ? I
tried to submit an issue there about a month ago and didn't receive any
feedback at all (no confirmation, no followup...). Is this service still
the recommended one for such report or is there something else you
recommend?
Thanks in advance
Mickael

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 4:04 PM Vicente Romero <vicente.romero at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think this is probably more a feature request than a bug but in any case
> please file an issue and assign it to myself,
>
> Thanks,
> Vicente
>
> On 8/19/24 12:02, Mickael Istria wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> As part of our work to allow Eclipse JDT to use Javac as backend, we
> noticed that in case of unresolved parameterized types, the compiler
> doesn't generate a nice recovered TypeSymbol with interesting data (such as
> the name) that can be used later.
> For example, my latest issue is that code like
> ```
> class K {
>   Regular reg;
>   Parameterized<Object> par;
> }
> ```
> where neither Regular nor Parameterized exist, make Javac produce a
> "recovered" symbol for `Regular` (at least the ErrorTypr stores the
> "Regular" name) when asking for the tsym of `reg` VarSymbol, while it
> doesn't produce anything useful for `Parameterized` when asking for the
> tsym of `par` VarSymbol. In this later case, the symbol points to `noType`
> which isn't usable by the IDE to generate a minimal DOM object.
>
> In comparison, ECJ generates a recovered type binding for `Parameterized`,
> which can be later used by some refactorings as if the type were existing.
> Such refactorings that work with ECJ backend cannot work with the Javac
> backend because of the symbol being unusable.
>
> We're currently adding a bunch of workarounds in many places to handle
> this case, but we'd obviously rather prefer if Javac can come with such
> smartness out of the box.
>
> So this behavior in Javac seems to me like a small issue or limitation in
> Javac. What do you think? Is this "problem" already known? Should this be
> reported as a bug? Does it make sense to expect Javac to provide such
> recovery for parameterized types to? Should we try to fix it?...
>
> Thanks in advance for you guidance
> --
> Mickael Istria
> Eclipse IDE <https://www.eclipse.org/eclipseide> developer, for Red Hat
> <https://developers.redhat.com/>
>
>
>

-- 
Mickael Istria
Eclipse IDE <https://www.eclipse.org/eclipseide> developer, for Red Hat
<https://developers.redhat.com/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20240820/1e7ef5ba/attachment.htm>