Type variable information is not always maintained for anonymous classes

[Sergei Ustimenko]

Hi David,

Thanks for checking it, I'll continue working on it then.
Just wondering if you have any thoughts on how fix would
look like.

Regards,
Sergei

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 02:34, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi Sergey,
>
> I've had a look and I don't think this issue is relevant to JDK-8171335.
> The problem seems to occur when you have a "hidden" enclosing context
> for the type, and that doesn't change with JDK-8171335.
>
> David
>
> On 9/12/2018 6:04 am, Sergey wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Thanks for pointing that out!
> >
> >  >We need to see how this example work in that case.
> >
> > I guess anyone involved could have straight away two
> > test cases: one from the bug itself and another from the
> > observation above.
> >
> > In any case. looking forward for that being fixed. I would
> > also be happy to be able to help with anything if needed.
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Sergei
> >
> > On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 at 12:03, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com
> > <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi Sergey,
> >
> >     Just FYI we're in the process of moving away from using anonymous
> >     classes for lambda's to using an extended Lookup.defineClass API -
> see:
> >
> >     https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171335
> >
> >     this is being done under Project Valhalla, with current work in the
> >     nestmates branch.
> >
> >     We need to see how this example work in that case.
> >
> >     Cheers,
> >     David
>
>