Joel, Thanks for responding so quickly! Here' s a slightly modified version of my repro recipe: You can see that local classes in instance methods have a receiver type, just like a member inner class. local classes in static methods (naturally!) do not. I expect the two flavors of local classes to be treated differently.
I've never understood why """All local classes are inner classes""" (even in a static method?) https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se8/html/jls-14.html#jls-14.3 import java.lang.reflect.Constructor; public class LocalClassReceiverTypeBug { public static void main(String[] args) throws Throwable { class StaticLocal {} printConstructor(StaticLocal.class); new LocalClassReceiverTypeBug().instanceMain(); } public void instanceMain() throws Throwable { class InstanceLocal {} printConstructor(InstanceLocal.class); printConstructor(Inner.class); // printConstructor(Nested.class); } static class Nested {} class Inner {} static void printConstructor(Class<?> klazz) { Constructor<?>[] constructors = klazz.getDeclaredConstructors(); if (constructors.length != 1) throw new AssertionError(); Constructor<?> constructor = constructors[0]; System.out.printf("constructor=%s receivertype=%s%n", constructor, constructor.getAnnotatedReceiverType()); } } ==> javac -source 9 -Xlint:all LocalClassReceiverTypeBug.java ==> java -esa -ea LocalClassReceiverTypeBug constructor=LocalClassReceiverTypeBug$1StaticLocal() receivertype=null constructor=LocalClassReceiverTypeBug$1InstanceLocal(LocalClassReceiverTypeBug) receivertype=null constructor=LocalClassReceiverTypeBug$Inner(LocalClassReceiverTypeBug) receivertype=sun.reflect.annotation.AnnotatedTypeFactory$AnnotatedTypeBaseImpl@1810399e On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Joel Borggrén-Franck < joel.borggren.fra...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Martin, > > I'm away from my workstation at the moment, so this is from memory. IIRC a > local class is pure scoping and lacks an "outer this" which is what you > annotate for constructors. There should not be receiver type to annotate. > Since I can't run your code I can't see what's wrong but I might be able to > help if you paste the output from a run. > > Cheers > /Joel > > On Jul 21, 2016 19:49, "Martin Buchholz" <marti...@google.com> wrote: > >> Hi Joel, Paul, >> >> A coworker ran into the change of behavior here in jdk9. Specifically, >> we noticed that a local class constructor has a receiver parameter, >> but getAnnotatedReceiverType returns null. The changed jdk9 spec is >> actually very clear about that: >> >> >> http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/api/java/lang/reflect/Constructor.html#getAnnotatedReceiverType-- >> """If this Executable object represents a static method or represents a >> constructor of a top level, static member, local, or anonymous class, then >> the return value is null.""" >> >> BUT we can't think of any reason WHY a local inner class would be treated >> differently from an inner member class. Why not the simple and obvious >> rule: if there is a receiver parameter, return an appropriate non-null >> AnnotatedType? >> >> You already have an excellent jtreg test, but here's what I was playing >> with: >> >> import java.lang.reflect.Constructor; >> >> public class LocalClassReceiverTypeBug { >> public static void main(String[] args) throws Throwable { >> class StaticLocal {} >> printConstructor(StaticLocal.class); >> new LocalClassReceiverTypeBug().instanceMain(); >> } >> >> public void instanceMain() throws Throwable { >> class InstanceLocal {} >> printConstructor(InstanceLocal.class); >> printConstructor(Inner.class); >> printConstructor(Nested.class); >> } >> >> static class Nested {} >> class Inner {} >> >> static void printConstructor(Class<?> klazz) { >> Constructor<?>[] constructors = klazz.getDeclaredConstructors(); >> if (constructors.length != 1) throw new AssertionError(); >> System.out.printf("constructor=%s%n", constructors[0]); >> System.out.printf("receiver type=%s%n", >> constructors[0].getAnnotatedReceiverType()); >> } >> } >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Joel Borggren-Franck < >> joel.fra...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>> On 2014-06-24, Paul Sandoz wrote: >>> > >>> > On Jun 17, 2014, at 6:52 PM, Joel Borggrén-Franck < >>> joel.fra...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > Can I get a review for this fix and javadoc clarification for >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044629 >>> > > >>> > >>> > +1 >>> > >>> > I never quite realised just how convoluted it was to determine that a >>> class is an inner class. >>> >>> Neither did I until I had to implement it :) >>> >>> cheers >>> /Joel >>> >> >>
