RFR[9]: 8147585: Annotations with lambda expressions has parameters result in wrong behavior.

[shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com]

Gentle reminder!!

On 6/3/2016 11:40 AM, shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com wrote:
> Thanks Vladimir and Joel!!
> Please see http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8147585/webrev.04/
> Added restriction for synthetic methods as well.
>
> On 6/2/2016 5:04 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/2/16 12:02 AM, Joel Borggrén-Franck wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think this was caught by the verifier before 8 since you couldn't 
>>> have
>>> concrete or private methods in an interface. Now you can (though not in
>>> Java for private ones).
>>>
>>> My spider sense tells me there might be something lurking here (though
>>> it was a while since this was in my L1 cache). It is not likely, but 
>>> I'm
>>> not 100% sure that it is impossible to make javac produce a bridge when
>>> compiling an annotation type for example, so why not remove synthetic
>>> methods as well?
>>
>> I'm not an expert in annotation processing, but it bothers me as 
>> well, since current behavior looks too Java-centric. There are valid 
>> (in JVMS sense) class files which are not produced by javac or from 
>> java source file.
>>
>> What is expected behavior in such case? It is unfortunate when 
>> non-Java languages have to obey to Java rules. It reminds me a 
>> problem with Class.getSimpleName() (see JDK-8057919 [1]) we fixed 
>> some time ago.
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8057919
>>
>>>
>>> Spending some time with ASM to do a bunch of tests not compilable in
>>> java might be useful, there should also be some frameworks in langtools
>>> to produce invalid classfiles IIRC.
>   Raised https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8158510 to include 
> new test cases.
>
> Regards,
> Shilpi
>>>
>>> cheers
>>> /Joel
>>>
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 at 17:49 shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com> <shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Thanks Paul!!
>>>     Please see http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8147585/webrev.03/
>>>
>>>     Thanks,
>>>     Shilpi
>>>
>>>     On 5/31/2016 7:57 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>>>     > >"Returns an array containing Method objects reflecting all the
>>>     declared methods of the class or interface represented by this 
>>> Class
>>>     object, including public, protected, default (package) access, and
>>>     private methods, but excluding inherited methods."
>>>
>