[rfc][icedtea-web] Remove wrongly 'undummied' JSObject->Java array code from MethodOverloadResolver

[Jiri Vanek]

On 05/01/2013 07:03 PM, Adam Domurad wrote:
> On 05/01/2013 09:38 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>> On 05/01/2013 03:06 PM, Adam Domurad wrote:
>>> On 05/01/2013 08:19 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>>> On 04/29/2013 09:15 PM, Adam Domurad wrote:
>>>>> So part of what motivated me to rewrite the old MethodOverloadResolver was the fact that I
>>>>> noticed it had a dummy JSObject defined at the bottom of the code, and it was mistakenly using
>>>>> that. It puzzled me why this wasn't observable. Well, it seems it is because the only code path
>>>>> that relied on JSObject itself was incorrect.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to Jana for the thorough tests that caught this!
>>>>> It looks like we do not support conversion of JSObject to a Java array in method signatures.
>>>>> This will bring the code back to its old functionality.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a want for the real fix, but I think we should do a fix in a separate step.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looks mostly corect. Will the tests need some fixes?
>>>
>>> No -- unfortunately the JSObject related tests are commented don't have the necessary privileges
>>> to create a JSObject.
>>
>> Not even in jana's tests?
>
> Oi, I'm a dummy. Current tests are correct, but see below about a few more we could have.
>
> I just realized we're not missing this functionality. The C++ function 'createJavaObjectFromVariant'
> automatically converts JS arrays to Java arrays before passing them. I have attached some additional
> unit tests. (ChangeLog in patch)
>
> However unfortunately I see other fundamental brokenness. It seems we'd need to ask for thie
> conversion from the Java-side to be sure it is correct.
>
> For example:
>
> JSObject someField; from Java side
> applet.someField = [1,1] from Javascript side,
>
> You'd expect it to be able to do this (it is a JSObject, after all), but actually it is not
> possible. This is because it is converted to a String[] array before-hand.
>
> As well:
> Object[] someField; from Java side
> applet.someField = [{}, 1]
> Is not possible. You'd expected an array of [JSObject, Integer], but the whole thing is a JSObject.
>
> Ignorance is bliss ... These cases do not seem to be handled by the reproducers (but I could be
> mistaken), some KnownToFail reproducers cases might be nice.
>
> Still happy hacking,
> -Adam

Looks ok from my side (code-verifiere) But I must admit this toppic is becoming slipping out of my 
hands. I would like also Jana's vote here.

Thank you for checks.
J.