Summary: | [1.5][compiler] Parameterized class nested statically inside another parameterized type causes compile errors when used in method signatures | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Eclipse Project] JDT | Reporter: | Will Hains <william.hains> | ||||
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Philipe Mulet <philippe_mulet> | ||||
Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||
Severity: | normal | ||||||
Priority: | P3 | CC: | dirk_baeumer | ||||
Version: | 3.1 | ||||||
Target Milestone: | 3.1 RC3 | ||||||
Hardware: | PC | ||||||
OS: | Windows 2000 | ||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Will Hains
2005-06-12 21:53:57 EDT
(Typo - I meant to say, "...even though it compiles fine in javac") Actually, the reference in the error message to "TestGeneric2<B>.Nested" is also nonsensical, for the same reason. Reproduced in RC2. We did not construct proper parameterized types in these few situations where implicit static member types were referenced. We were using generic type binding in place of a parameterized type where enclosing is a raw type. Fix is available. +1 for RC3 Dirk - would you please vote for it ? Added GenericTypeTest#test743 Created attachment 22919 [details]
Patch for jdt/core
+1 for RC3. Is there any impact on JDT/UI you can think of ? It should only be better, as offending bindings were really misleading. We will run your test anyway. JDT UI amd Refactoring tests are passing with this patch (ignoring the known failure for TypeRulesTest#testIsCastCompatible()) Thanks Jerome. Will release to HEAD. Verified using N20050616-0010 + JDT/Core HEAD |