Summary: | [plan][compiler] Access restriction should also apply to inherited members | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Eclipse Project] JDT | Reporter: | Philipe Mulet <philippe_mulet> |
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Maxime Daniel <maxime_daniel> |
Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | P3 | CC: | axb, dirk_baeumer, gunnar, mlists |
Version: | 3.1 | ||
Target Milestone: | 3.2 M5 | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Windows XP | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Attachments: |
Description
Philipe Mulet
2004-10-14 10:42:17 EDT
Attempted a fix, that: - propagates access restrictions from types to their methods and fields; - checks such access restrictions; - reports a new series of errors associated to illegal access to constructors, methods and fields. A case of interest has been raised by the double diagnostic on types and constructors when the latter is invoked implicitly. The fix avoids this for access restrictions. Side effects: - deprecation detection suffered from the double diagnostic described above; this has been removed and tests have been aligned accordingly; - breakages in the SuppressWarnings behavior have raised an investigation of the severity of deprecated references within javadoc tags; the fix changes the behavior in that it takes the min severity of those (instead of the max). The three attachment that follow give the fix. A review with other team members is planned for tomorrow, and the fix provided so far should not be considered as a release candidate. Created attachment 22702 [details]
Fix draft - see WORK task tags for review
Created attachment 22703 [details]
Tests - part added, part aligned according to the fix side effects -compiler
Created attachment 22704 [details]
Tests - part added, part aligned according to the fix side effects - model
+1 for RC3 Dirk - would you vote for this to be fixed ? Without it, we have a hole in our access restriction story (when inherited members). Discussing with Dirk, we agreed to defer this one to a later stage, since it is not a critical defect, but rather an enhancement. Good candidate for 3.1.1 Refreshed patches to catch up with 3.1 maintenance branch. Still needs review. (Note: since we do not add any problem IDs, the patch should apply to HEAD unchanged.) Not for 3.1.1, will release this into 3.2 (In reply to comment #1) ... > Side effects: ... > - breakages in the SuppressWarnings behavior have raised an investigation of > the severity of deprecated references within javadoc tags; the fix changes > the behavior in that it takes the min severity of those (instead of the > max). Thinking a second time over the issue, reverted back to the previous behavior in this area, the UI delivering a consistent user experience. Created attachment 32416 [details]
New proposal, sync'd with v_631 level, workspace unified format
Added the test class AccessRestrictionsTests to show typical use cases. This fix triggers a full rebuild of the workspace. Verified for 3.2 M5 using build I20060214-0010 |