Review Request: 7140852: Add test for 7022100

[Coleen Phillimore]

Thank you for doing this.  It looks good!
Coleen

On 2/1/2013 2:50 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
> On 2013-02-01 00:15, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>>
>> Stefan,
>>
>> I just read through this test and it looks like a good test to me 
>> (but I'm not an expert and it took a while to figure out how it 
>> worked).   I had two questions.  Why does the same definition for 
>> @interface ParameterAnnotation {} appear in both 
>> RedefineMethodWithAnnotationTarget*.java files?   Can't it be in it's 
>> own file and just once?  Or is it different (didn't see any 
>> differences).
> I've moved it to its own file now and added the needed extra 
> infrastructure to get test to work with that.
>
>>
>> Also is do_redefine supposed to be doRedefine as per Java coding 
>> convention or is that a known variation?
>
> Fixed. It was the name used in the test that I copied the code from.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/7140852/webrev.01/
>
> thanks,
> StefanK
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen
>>
>> On 01/22/2013 09:39 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/7140852/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> This test provoked the bug in:
>>> 7022100: Method annotations are incorrectly set when redefining classes
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> StefanK
>>
>