Clarification on type use

[Alex Buckley]

Yes. TYPE or TYPE_PARAMETER, actually.

On 4/3/2014 1:05 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> I once heard someone say that TYPE_USE is a parent of TYPE. Thus,
> wherever a valid TYPE can appear, a TYPE_USE would also be valid in the
> same place. Right/wrong?
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Alex Buckley <alex.buckley at oracle.com
> <mailto:alex.buckley at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Eric, I am on type-annotations-dev, you don't need to cc me every time.
>
>     The TYPE_USE enum constant is specified in the javadoc for the
>     j.l.a.ElementType enum type: "The constant TYPE_USE corresponds to
>     the 15 type contexts in JLS 4.11, as well as to two declaration
>     contexts: type declarations (including annotation type declarations)
>     and type parameter declarations."  ["15" should be "16", there's a
>     bug out for that.]
>
>     Alex
>
>     On 4/3/2014 9:19 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
>
>         The following is exerpted from the test
>         langtools/test/tools/javac/__annotations/typeAnnotations/__TypeUseTarget.java:
>
>         @A
>         class TypeUseTarget<K extends @A Object> {
>         ...
>         }
>
>         @Target(ElementType.TYPE_USE)
>         @interface A { }
>
>
>         The first use of A seems to be on the class TypeUseTarget.  The
>         result
>         with the current implementation is that javac produces a
>         RuntimeInvisibleAnnotations attribute for the class TypeUseTarget.
>
>         But is this valid?  I can't seem to find anything in the type
>         annotations spec that suggests that an annotation with a
>         TYPE_USE target
>         can wind up being a regular annotation on a class (or interface).
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Paul