Summary: | Unexpected null in compiler error message | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Eclipse Project] JDT | Reporter: | Peter Burka <peter_burka> |
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Olivier Thomann <Olivier_Thomann> |
Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | P3 | ||
Version: | 2.0 | ||
Target Milestone: | 2.1 M5 | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Windows XP | ||
Whiteboard: |
Description
Peter Burka
2002-08-23 12:13:39 EDT
Note that the sender was actually sending init(null). Seems we are reconstructing the signature from the argument types instead of the parameter types. I think the problem is more that the NullBinding readable name is null. When you use null as a parameter, the corresponding binding is the NullBinding. This would explain why null is displayed in the method signature. null is used as an argument, but the method declared parameter isn't of type NullBinding. This is what my comment was meaning. So I am wondering why we seem to be recreating a signature using the invocation argument types as opposed presenting the declared method signature. Indeed the problem method binding was created using the parameter types. We should instead use the methodBinding.parameters. I check the fix. Changes reviewed by Kent. Fixes and released in 2.1 stream. Tests updated. Verified. |