RFR: 8009411 : getMethods should not inherit static methods from interfaces

[Peter Levart]

On 09/12/2013 03:37 PM, Joel Borggrén-Franck wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/8009411/webrev.01/
>
> Thanks to Remi and Peter for the quick feedback, I've updated the code
> to use for-each as well as fixing getMethod(...).
>
> Andreas Lundblad also added ~100 testcases for getMethod(), both
> positive and negative.
>
> Please review
>
> cheers
> /Joel

Hi Joel,

This looks correct now. I just wonder about the following corner case. 
Suppose you have:

public interface A {
     default void m() {
     }
}

public interface B extends A {
     static void m() {
     }
}

public interface C extends B {
}

This does not actually compile, and I think this is correct:

/home/peter/work/local/DefaultVsStaticInterfaceMethodCrash/src/B.java
     Error:Error:line (2)java: m() in B clashes with m() in A
   overriding method is static


But if interface A at first does not have method m(), it compiles. If 
later default method m() is added to interface A and A is compiled 
separately, then what happens?

The C.class.getMethods() returns a 1 element array containing A.m(), but 
C.class.getMethod("m") throws NoSuchMethodException.

This seems inconsistent, but it's a corner case that can only happen 
with separate compilation.


Regards, Peter

>
> On 2013-09-09, Joel Borggrén-Franck wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Pleaser review fix for 8009411 : getMethods should not inherit static methods from interfaces
>>
>> The issue is that since we added static methods to interfaces those have erroneously been reflected in getMethods of implementing classes. This fix filters out static interface methods from superinterfaces when adding methods. I have also added a note to the javadoc for both getMembers and getDeclaredMembers pointing this out (though it is implied from JLS). Webrev is based on the clarification to getMethods and friends out for review on this list.
>>
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/8009411/webrev.00/
>> Bug is here: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8009411
>>
>> For oracle reviewers, ccc is approved.
>>
>> cheers
>> /Joel