On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 21:35, Matthias Bläsing
<mblaes...@doppel-helix.eu.invalid> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 27.10.2022 um 20:51 +0100 schrieb Neil C Smith:
> > I'm not sure that's correct from the JVM perspective. The Object
> > method should still be generated as a bridge?
> >
> > It should be backwards compatible but it's not forwards compatible?
> > Anything compiled against 15 should run on 16, but anything compiled
> > against 16 won't run on 15?
> >
> > I still think it's probably a good idea to revert in this particular
> > case though.
>
> you are right and my reasoning was wrong. I looked at the generated
> code with javap and there I see:
Thanks for confirming! It was my thought in reviewing the original
PR, but there are so many question marks in the paragraph above
because generics never cease to confuse me! :-)
This got me thinking whether there's a workaround for Ernie to force
the bridge method to be called.
Maybe using raw references? - (at least doing this with String and
testing with javap seems to work) -
Comparable specVersion = mi.getSpecificationVersion();
Comparable reqVersion = new SpecificationVersion("9.26");
if (specVersion.compareTo(reqVersion)) >= 0) { // etc etc
It's still a bad idea to compile against a later platform and expect
it to work on an earlier one, but that might just work in this case.
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
