127766 – [1.5][compiler] inconsistent treatment of explicit subclasses of Enum

Bug 127766 - [1.5][compiler] inconsistent treatment of explicit subclasses of Enum

Summary: [1.5][compiler] inconsistent treatment of explicit subclasses of Enum

Status:	VERIFIED FIXED

Alias:	None

Product:	JDT
Classification:	Eclipse Project
Component:	Core (show other bugs)
Version:	3.2
Hardware:	PC All

Importance:	P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone:	3.2 RC4
Assignee:	Olivier Thomann
QA Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2006-02-14 11:33 EST by Adam Kiezun
Modified:	2006-05-11 22:02 EDT (History)
CC List:	2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Proposed fix (1.17 KB, patch) 2006-05-08 12:12 EDT, Olivier Thomann	no flags	Details \| Diff
Regression test (7.91 KB, patch) 2006-05-08 12:12 EDT, Olivier Thomann	no flags	Details \| Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description Adam Kiezun

2006-02-14 11:33:42 EST

3.2M4

It seems to be disallowed to create explicit, named subclasses of Enum.
But anonymous subclasses are not disallowed. Not sure if this is a bug in the compiler or hole in the spec or just a bizzare feature of the language.

//no error here
Enum e= new Enum("foo", 2){
 public int compareTo(Object o) {
  return 0;
  }            
}

class B extends Enum{ } //error here

Comment 1 Olivier Thomann

2006-05-08 11:49:54 EDT

The first case that doesn't fail to compile reports:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.VerifyError: (class: X$1, method: <init> signature: (Ljava/lang/String;I)V) Expecting to find unitialized object on stack
	at X.main(X.java:7)

at runtime.

Comment 2 Olivier Thomann

2006-05-08 12:12:00 EDT

Created attachment 40608 [details]
Proposed fix

Comment 3 Olivier Thomann

2006-05-08 12:12:16 EDT

Created attachment 40609 [details]
Regression test

Comment 4 Philipe Mulet

2006-05-10 15:30:13 EDT

Fix looks good. 
+1 for 3.2RC4

Darin/Dani: pls cast your vote. Fix is trivial (exact same check we perform when connecting superclasses, but anonymous use a different codepath which didn't check).

Comment 5 Philipe Mulet

2006-05-10 15:30:35 EDT

Dani - pls  vote

Comment 6 Dani Megert

2006-05-10 15:47:27 EDT

Looked at the patch - approving for 3.2 RC4.

Comment 7 Darin Wright

2006-05-10 15:53:31 EDT

+1

Comment 8 Olivier Thomann

2006-05-10 16:37:54 EDT

Fixed and released in HEAD.
Regression test added in org.eclipse.jdt.core.tests.compiler.regression.EnumTest.test128

Comment 9 Olivier Thomann

2006-05-11 22:02:54 EDT

Verified with I20060511-2000 for 3.2RC4