hg: jdk7/tl/langtools: 3 new changesets

[Martin Buchholz]

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 08:21, Rémi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

>
>  Changeset: d6fe0ea070aa
>> Author:    mcimadamore
>> Date:      2010-08-19 11:52 +0100
>> URL:       http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/langtools/rev/d6fe0ea070aa
>>
>> 6885255: Improve usability of raw warnings
>> Summary: raw warnings should be disabled in (i) instanceof expressions and
>> (ii) when java.lang.Class is not parameterized
>> Reviewed-by: jjg
>>
>> ! src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/Attr.java
>> ! src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/Check.java
>> ! test/tools/javac/warnings/6747671/T6747671.java
>> ! test/tools/javac/warnings/6747671/T6747671.out
>> + test/tools/javac/warnings/6885255/T6885255.java
>> + test/tools/javac/warnings/6885255/T6885255.out
>>
>>
>
> We discuss [1] about Class<rawtype> and instanceof rawtype but not cast
> (rawtype).
> I was able to convince myself that a cast with a raw type doesn't harm.
>
> I just want to be sure that it's ok for everybody (Martin?).
>
>



> Rémi
> [1] http://blogs.sun.com/mcimadamore/entry/diagnosing_raw_types
>
>
Remi, Thanks for reminding me of that blog entry.

Maurizio, thanks for fixing this.

I may try to clean up warnings in j.u.c. someday, and see what happens.

One more thought... if we accept your statement that

"""The second argument of an instanceof should be a reifiable (see JLS 4.7)
reference type"""

then in today's world if they wrote

if (x instanceof List<?>) { ..... ((List<String>) x) }

then that would fail in some future world when reification allowed us to
distinguish between List<?> and List<String> at runtime.  In other words,
pushing people to switch from

instanceof List

to

instanceof List<?>

may be doing them a disservice.

Martin (not a compiler guy)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/attachments/20100819/6cbb6ea8/attachment.html>