Community
Participate
Working Groups
This bug exists within Eclipse Version 3.2.0, I20060519-1206 I was working with a drag-and-drop tree class based on JTree. It was working fine for the past hour, but all of the sudden I got an error about: "The type java.util.set cannot be resolved. It is indirectly referenced from required .class files" I ended up fighting with it for about 15-30 mintues, and finally decided to try closing Eclipse and restarting it. That fixed the problem. Then, today I got a similar error: "The type java.util.Iterator cannot be resolved. It is indirectly referenced from required .class files" With java.util.Iterator, I imported the entire java.util package into my class file, and it had no effect to the error message. But sure enough, close Eclipse, restart it, and the error goes away. I would really like to not have to restart Eclipse every 5 minutes :-p. This is affecting my work process considerably, since I have to wait a minute for Eclipse to start back up, and then get focused on what I was working on before the error occured. If this error could be fixed, it would be greatly appreciated.
We suspect a timing issue here. Coolman - do you remember a 3.2 build which worked fine for you before ? Also, is the error visible in the problem view, or only in the editor ? Last, which VM are you using to run Eclipse on ?
This is the first 3.2 build I'm trying...wanted to play around with the new data functionality. I believe it's only visible in the editor, but I haven't checked the problem view yet. I will check it the next time the error occurs...I'm sure I'll get at least one instance today :). Eclipse is using jre 1.5.0_06 (confirmed it using SysInternals Process Explorer), but I also have j2re 1.4.2_06 installed.
It doesn't show up in the Problems view. Although, this time something interesting happened that may help you figure out what's going on... I was working with the Class.forName function, and I typed in as much as "Class.", then scrolled down to forName, and pressed F2 (since I do believe in the previous version of Eclipse, F2 used to give focus to the tooltip so that it could be scrolled through, copied, etc.) Of course, in this version, it doesn't work. So I pressed Ctrl+Space, since the list was just begging me to try it :-p. (I know...nothing would show up for templates for the Class class anyways) Then the error occured: "The type java.lang.Class cannot be resolved. It is indirectly referenced from required .class files" When I restarted Eclipse, the error went away. I couldn't reproduce the error with the above procedure. Could the errors possibly be linked to the dropdown of the function parameters?
Soryy, I cannot reproduce. However could you please delete org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.0.v_668.jar from your plugins directory, copy http://www.eclipse.org/jdt/core/patches/org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.0.z20060531-1812.jar to this plugins directory instead, and let me know if this improves things ?
Just applied the patch...and I will let you know if there are any issues (I should know in an hour or two...) (just a note...not that it would affect anything...but I had org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.0.v_667.jar in my plugins directory instead of org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.0.v_668.jar.)
v_667 means that you're on 3.2 RC5 (v_668 is 3.2 RC6). But the patch should still apply.
Please ignore patch in comment 4. I identified the cause (bad side effect on a MethodInfo in the Java model cache) and posted a new patch. Could you please delete any org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.0.*.jar from your plugins directory, copy http://www.eclipse.org/jdt/core/patches/org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.0.z20060602-1334.jar to this plugins directory instead, and confirm this fixes the problem ?
If the patch fixes the problem, this bug would be a dup of bug 140879.
Yeah...the second patch seems to work (the first patch you sent me also worked.) I marked it as a duplicate...sorry about that. Bugzilla should really get a better embedded search engine...about 90% of the bug reports I've posted have been duplicates, yet I couldn't find them using the search. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 140879 ***
