On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 15:34:25 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Core reflection's generic signature parsing uses an ancient library with >> outdated visitor pattern on a tree model and contains unnecessary >> boilerplates. This is a duplication of ClassFile API's signature model. We >> should just move to ClassFile API, which is more throughoutly tested as well. >> >> To ensure compatibility, new tests are added to ensure consistent behavior >> when encountering malformed signatures or signatures with missing types. The >> reflective objects have been preserved and the only change is that lazy >> expansion now happens from CF objects, to reduce compatibility risks. > > Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge > or a rebase. The pull request now contains five commits: > > - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into > feature/new-generic-info > - Improve BytecodeDescriptor error message > - Years, test facelift > - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into > feature/new-generic-info > - 8333377: Migrate Generic Signature parsing to ClassFile API Since [JDK‑8368331] has been fixed now, this PR should probably be linked to [JDK‑8351103] as well. [JDK‑8351103]: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351103 "[JDK‑8351103] JVMS class signature specification disagrees with implementation" [JDK‑8368331]: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8368331 "[JDK‑8368331] ClassFile Signature parsing fails for type parameter with no supertype" ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19281#issuecomment-3438779549
