8202471: Resolves generic receiver type for types with generic signatures

[David Holmes]

On 23/07/2019 3:08 pm, Rafael Winterhalter wrote:
> Thanks, I'll send an inline version this evening. I have written a 
> couple of reproducers for these issues. Should I add them to jtreg and 
> also send them as an inline patch?

Yes, please do.

Thanks,
David

> I'll submit the CSR tonight, too.
> 
> Thanks for the pointers!
> Best regards, Rafael
> 
> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>> 
> schrieb am Di., 23. Juli 2019, 06:10:
> 
>     Hi Rafael,
> 
>     A couple of comments on process here ...
> 
>     On 23/07/2019 6:48 am, Rafael Winterhalter wrote:
>      > Hello,
>      >
>      > I have created a patch such that getReceiverType() returns a
>     parameterized
>      > type if the receiver type declaration is itself generic.
>     Currently, the
>      > receiver type is always a type representation of Class such that
>      > annotations on the type variables or the receiver type's owner
>     type cannot
>      > be resolved:
>     https://gist.github.com/raphw/a155d5ef66d11e5fb131b7e6b8fb10e5
> 
>     All OpenJDK contributions must be provided via OpenJDK infrastructure,
>     so either direct code in an email to a mailing list (attachments
>     usually
>     get stripped), or a webrev hosted on cr.openjdk.java.net
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net> (available
>     directly to Authors else find someone to host for you). Links to github
>     are not acceptable at this time.
> 
>      > Note that this change can potentially break existing code if
>     callers of the
>      > method expect this behavior for parameterized receiver types.
>     However,
>      > without this change, the type information is lost and I would
>     argue that
>      > the current behavior can be considered to be incorrect.
> 
>     That argument needs to be made via a Compatibility and Specification
>     Review (CSR) request:
> 
>     https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/csr/Main
> 
>     Cheers,
>     David
> 
>      > Best regards, Rafael
>      >
>