RFR: 8004912: Repeating annotations - getAnnotationsByType is not working as expected

[Alex Buckley]

The text you quoted ("When the new...") is a high-level explanation - a 
policy - of how Core Reflection should work. The text then proceeds to 
give definitions suitable for the API spec: "This policy for Java SE 8 
is reified in the following definitions: ...".

Alex

On 10/22/2013 7:06 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the spec. document:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~abuckley/8misc.pdf
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eabuckley/8misc.pdf>
>
> on page 11, chapter 1.2 the following:
>
>> When the new get[Declared]AnnotationsByType(Class<T>) methods are
>> called for a repeatable annotation type T, the question is how to
>> extend the policy
>> to handle multiple annotations of type T on the superclass and/or
>> subclass. Oracle
>> proposes the following policy for Java SE 8:
>>
>> • If a class declaration does not have either a "directly present"
>> annotation of
>> type T or an "indirectly present by containment" annotation of type T,
>> the class
>> declaration may be "associated" with an annotation of type T due to
>> inheritance.
>>
>> • If a class declaration does have either a "directly present"
>> annotation of type T
>> or an "indirectly present by containment" annotation of type T, the
>> annotation
>> is deemed to "override" every annotation of type T which is
>> "associated" with
>> the superclass.
>
> ...seems to be unnecessary complication. It could be replaced simply by:
>
> When the new get[Declared]AnnotationsByType(Class<T>) methods are
> called for a repeatable annotation type T, they return annotations
> of type T *associated* with annotated element E.
>
> Since term "associated" is already defined below as:
>
>> • An annotation A is *associated* with an element E if either:
>>  - A is directly or indirectly present on E; or
>>  - No annotation of A's type is directly or indirectly present on E,
>> and E is a class,
>> and A's type is inheritable (§9.6.3.3), and A is associated with the
>> superclass
>> of E.
>
>
> Regards, Peter
>