On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Grzegorz Kossakowski < [email protected]> wrote:
> The problem I described above (broken polymorphic calls) was caused by > superClass field being equal to null for nodes representing > interfaces. That would lead to broken overrides calculations for an > interface containing method called toString (that overrides one from > java.lang.Object) and thus to broken JS output. That was fairly > non-trivial to find because you need toString being called through an > interface to trigger that behaviour. > > Now, I'm wondering if it wouldn't make sense to have an assertion in > some place checking that whether interfaces have java.lang.Object as > their superClass as it seems to be invariant for GWT. I seem to recall at one point we actually put some thought into not having super interfaces have a superClass field at all, and just always have the compiler implicitly assume Object. Not sure where that idea went, or why we ended up not doing that. Scott -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
