Review Request: 7140852: Add test for 7022100

[Stefan Karlsson]

On 2013-02-01 01:34, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
> Stefan,
>
> Looks good.
> Agreed with Coleen: do_redefine => doRedefine.
> I guess, this name was taken from one of old tests. :)
> I'm Ok with two definitions of the interface ParameterAnnotation.

Thanks for the review,
StefanK
>
> Thanks,
> Setguei
>
>
> On 1/31/13 3:15 PM, 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).
>>
>> Also is do_redefine supposed to be doRedefine as per Java coding 
>> convention or is that a known variation?
>>
>> 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
>>
>