review request (M): 7117167: Misc warnings in java.lang.invoke and sun.invoke.*
Stuart Marks
stuart.marks at oracle.com
Tue Dec 6 15:42:15 PST 2011
On 12/1/11 3:12 PM, John Rose wrote:
> 7117167: Misc warnings in java.lang.invoke and sun.invoke.*
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jrose/7117167/webrev.00/
>
> Removing build warnings from java.lang.invoke and sun.invoke.*, as part of the December 2011 cleanup effort.
Hi John,
I'm finally getting back to this. Just a couple comments:
MethodHandles.java --
The change here is to add a wildcard type parameter to the parameter of the
unreflectConstructor() method. I believe this is a public API. Is such a change
permitted? I started thinking about compatibility, but compatibility is
actually a side issue. The main issue is whether it's a spec change. I think it
is, but I have to admit that not really sure. But if it is a spec change, I
don't think we should be making it in the context of warnings cleanup.
MethodHandleImpl.java --
Just an observation, really, but I puzzled for a while over the suppression of
rawtypes and unchecked warnings at the construction of AllocateObject (L115).
As I looked further I realized, "oh *that's* what Remi was talking about." [1]
On the other hand I see your point that the class declaration AllocateObject<C>
and uses of C within that class really do make sense. Perhaps this is the time
when one really wants to write
new AllocateObject<?>(...)
but of course this is illegal. I don't have a specific recommendation to change
anything here. It's just that whenever there's code that's puzzling, I'm always
looking around for a better way to write it.
Anyway, that's it, everything else looks fine.
s'marks
[1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8-dev/2011-December/000406.html
More information about the jdk8-dev
mailing list