hg: lambda/lambda/langtools: Bug fixes:

[Peter Levart]

It's only for consistency if nothing else. Currently, for all other purposes, adding a default to a normal interface method (transforming it to a defender method) is a source and binary compatible change. Not with SAM interfaces though.

What would be wrong with this definition of SAM types:

SAM type is a reference type with a single non-Object abstract non-defender method and any number of abstract defender methods or a reference type with a single abstract defender method and no non-Object abstract non-defender methods.


Regards, Peter

On 08/19/10, Brian Goetz wrote:
> I say no.  This is a Zero Abstract Method (ZAM) type :)
> 
> 
> On 8/19/2010 9:00 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
> > On 08/19/10, maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com wrote:
> >> Changeset: ce46b6012362
> >> Author:    mcimadamore
> >> Date:      2010-08-19 13:11 +0100
> >> URL:       http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/langtools/rev/ce46b6012362
> >>
> >> Bug fixes:
> >> *) check that the compiler emits meaningful diagnostics when the lambda body contains bad statements
> >> *) the routine that checks for SAM types should skip defender methods in extended interfaces
> >
> > I don't know, but should this extended interface be considered a SAM type or not?
> >
> > public interface UncleSam {
> >    extension BigDecimal calculateTaxes(String taxPayerId) default Tax.calc;
> > }
> >
> > Regards, Peter
> >
> >
> >> *) failure of regression test CheckExamples.java depending on localization settings
> >>
> >> ! src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/code/Types.java
> >> ! src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/parser/JavacParser.java
> >> ! test/tools/javac/diags/examples/IllegalChar.java
> >> + test/tools/javac/lambda/BadStatementInLambda.java
> >> + test/tools/javac/lambda/BadStatementInLambda.out
> >> + test/tools/javac/lambda/Defender01.java
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>