On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 20:19:44 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Please review this patch that fixes the issue where type annotations on > primitive types are not linked. > > Tested with file > https://cr.openjdk.org/~liach/8325433-arrayanno/ArrayAnno.java > > import java.lang.annotation.*; > > public class ArrayAnno { > @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) > @Target(ElementType.TYPE_USE) > @Documented > public @interface Anno { int value(); } > > public void method(@Anno(1) int @Anno(2) [] @Anno(3) [] arg) {} > public void method(@Anno(1) String @Anno(2) [] @Anno(3) [] arg) {} > } > > JDK 21: https://cr.openjdk.org/~liach/8325433-arrayanno/old/ArrayAnno.html > This patch: https://cr.openjdk.org/~liach/8325433-arrayanno/new/ArrayAnno.html > > Note that a bug within javac causes the annotations to become `@Anno(1) > String @Anno(3) [] @Anno(2) []` in the output files; this bug also affects > output class files so I assume this is a bug within javac's tree building. > (Intersting, the buggy javadoc output was copied wholesale in the original > `TestTypeAnnotations` output for `array2Deep` cases, but no one paid > attention to it) Changes requested by gli (Committer). test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testTypeAnnotations/typeannos/Fields.java line 72: > 70: > 71: public final @FldA int primitive = 0; > 72: public final @FldA int @FldB [] primitiveArray1Deep = null; These two fields have not been verified? test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testTypeAnnotations/typeannos/MethodReturnType.java line 54: > 52: > 53: @MRtnA int primitive() { return 0; } > 54: @MRtnA int @MRtnB [] primitiveArray1Deep() { return null; } These two fields have not been verified? ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18179#pullrequestreview-1927016081 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18179#discussion_r1519212039 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18179#discussion_r1519212869
