Annotations on Type

[Jonathan Gibbons]

Werner,

The time has passed for small fixes in JDK 8.   We are planning to fix a 
bunch of type-anno stuff when 9 opens, and hopefully backport the fixes 
into an early 8 update.   We can look at your additional fixes at the 
same time.

-- Jon


On 12/05/2013 02:08 PM, Werner Dietl wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just noticed that the following test is @ignored:
>
> test/tools/javac/processing/model/type/BasicAnnoTests.java
>
> The test doesn't have a valid bug ID, so I couldn't check whether
> anyone is working on it.
> I found this mailing list discussion, which I think was the start for
> this test case:
>
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/type-annotations-dev/2013-January/000532.html
>
> In the type-annotations repository, I've added more test cases that
> illustrate another aspect of this issue.
>
> If you have a generic type like "List<@TA String>" the type annotation
> @TA is correctly put into the String tree.type field (in
> com.sun.tools.javac.comp.Attr.annotateType(...).new Worker()
> {...}.run()), however, this happens after the type for List is
> generated.
> The List tree only has type "List<String>" instead of "List<@TA String>".
> The later modification of the type of String obviously doesn't modify
> the type argument list for the "List" type.
> com.sun.tools.javac.comp.Attr.visitAnnotatedType(JCAnnotatedType) only
> takes the un-annotated type.
> When com.sun.tools.javac.comp.Attr.visitTypeApply(JCTypeApply) creates
> the list of actuals, it stores these un-annotated types. Later updates
> to the type argument Trees are then not reflected here.
>
> In a previous iteration, we created an AnnotatedType with empty
> annotations and later filled in the actual annotations. This ensured
> that all locations that referenced the AnnotatedType were updated, but
> had other drawbacks.
>
> Is somebody working on fixing this test case?
> Any ideas for how we can fix this?
>
> I pushed the extended test case to the type-annotations repository:
>
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/type-annotations/type-annotations/langtools/rev/882808d3b51f
>
> I also performed a few cleanups:
>
> - get rid of all "unused import" warnings in langtools javax packages:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/type-annotations/type-annotations/langtools/rev/f8b150f1e339
>
> - typo fix:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/type-annotations/type-annotations/langtools/rev/113d21b7ced6
>
> - improve an error message:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/type-annotations/type-annotations/langtools/rev/7e1e8c568a26
>
> - don't build an error String for a simple null check:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/type-annotations/type-annotations/langtools/rev/bbf852ffad28
>
> - don't create unused local variable:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/type-annotations/type-annotations/langtools/rev/f189794ce07a
>
> All feedback and reviews for pushing to TL welcome!
>
> Cheers,
> cu, WMD.
>