[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-12589?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18135469#comment-18135469
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on GROOVY-12589:
-----------------------------------------

codeconsole opened a new pull request, #3114:
URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/3114

   **Stacked on #3049** (GROOVY-12518, which adds the `super$` helpers for 
`super` property access in closures under `@CompileStatic`). Only the last 
commit is this change; the rest is #3049.
   
   Within a class nested in its superclass, `super.name` under `@CompileStatic` 
called the wrong accessor or failed:
   
   ```groovy
   import groovy.transform.CompileStatic
   
   class Base {
       boolean f
       boolean isF() { true }
       boolean getF() { false }
       @CompileStatic
       static class Sub extends Base {
           boolean isF() { false }
           boolean getF() { true }
           def plain() { super.f }
           def test() { def c = { -> super.f }; c() }
       }
   }
   new Base.Sub().test() // MissingPropertyException: No such property: f for 
class: Base$Sub
   ```
   
   Dynamic Groovy calls `Base.isF`. On master both methods throw; with #3049 
the plain `super.f` works and the closure and lambda forms still throw. If 
`Sub` overrides only `isF`, they called `Base.getF`. Any overridden getter 
(`String getX()`) failed the same way, and `{ -> super.x = v }` threw 
`VerifyError`.
   
   The type checker found the field in the superclass, which is an enclosing 
class here, so it resolved `super.name` as that field, recorded no accessor and 
asked for no `super$` helper. The code generators always go through the 
accessor for `super.name`; in a closure they found no helper and fell back to a 
dynamic `getPropertyOnSuper`, which cannot reach the overridden accessors of a 
statically compiled class. `StaticTypeCheckingVisitor.existsProperty` now 
resolves `super.name` and `Outer.super.name` through the accessors of the 
superclass even within the declaring class of the field, choosing `isName` 
before `getName` for a boolean property as the code generators and dynamic 
Groovy do, so a closure calls the accessor through the `super$` helper.
   
   ## Tests
   
   `FieldsAndPropertiesSTCTest.testSuperPropertyInClassNestedInSuperclass` 
fails without the change under static compilation 
(`FieldsAndPropertiesStaticCompileTest`); it covers static nested and inner 
subclasses, reads in plain code, closures, lambdas and nested closures, 
generated and overridden accessors, and writes and compound assignments in 
closures. `testSuperBooleanPropertyWithIsserAndGetter` covers the accessor 
choice for a plain subclass. The `groovy.transform.stc`, 
`org.codehaus.groovy.classgen.asm.sc`, `org.codehaus.groovy.transform.sc`, 
`gls` and `org.codehaus.groovy.transform.traitx` packages and 
`groovy.ThisAndSuperTest` pass. The Checkstyle and CodeNarc gates pass.
   
   Seen in 4.0.33, 5.0.8 and 6.0.0.
   




> SC: super.name within a class nested in its superclass calls the wrong 
> accessor or throws MissingPropertyException
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: GROOVY-12589
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-12589
>             Project: Groovy
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 4.0.33, 5.0.8, 6.0.0
>            Reporter: Scott Murphy Heiberg
>            Priority: Major
>
> {code:groovy}
> import groovy.transform.*
> class Base {
>     boolean f
>     boolean isF() { true }
>     boolean getF() { false }
>     @CompileStatic
>     static class Sub extends Base {
>         boolean isF() { false }
>         boolean getF() { true }
>         def plain() { super.f }
>         def test() { def c = { -> super.f }; c() }
>     }
> }
> assert new Base.Sub().plain()
> assert new Base.Sub().test()
> {code}
> Actual: groovy.lang.MissingPropertyException: No such property: f for class: 
> Base$Sub, for both methods. If Sub overrides only isF, both return the result 
> of Base.getF instead. The same happens for any property whose getter Sub 
> overrides (for example String x with getX), and assigning super.x in a 
> closure throws VerifyError.
> Expected: both assertions pass. Base.isF is called, as in dynamic Groovy.
> Within a class nested in its superclass, the type checker resolves super.f as 
> the superclass field that the nested class may access, so it records no 
> accessor and requests no super$ helper, and static compilation falls back to 
> a dynamic getPropertyOnSuper call. That call cannot reach the overridden 
> accessors of a statically compiled class, which has no MOP methods. A plain 
> subclass that is not nested in its superclass is not affected.
> Seen in 4.0.33, 5.0.8, 6.0.0 and master. With PR #3049 (GROOVY-12518) the 
> plain super.f works and only the closure and lambda forms fail.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v10.3.26#10030026)

Reply via email to