Bug 215590 - Various small problems with 1.6.X
Summary: Various small problems with 1.6.X
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: AspectJ
Classification: Tools
Component: Compiler (show other bugs)
Version: 1.6.0M1   Edit
Hardware: PC Mac OS X - Carbon (unsup.)
: P3 major (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Andrew Clement CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 223446 247914 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-01-16 19:37 EST by Andrew Clement CLA
Modified: 2013-06-24 11:07 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments
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 Andrew Clement CLA 2008-01-16 19:37:15 EST 
Some of these are documented in the readme, but I'm capturing specifics in here based on the code I am committing for 1.6.0m1.

tag OPTIMIZE is left here and there around the code at places where we could do better.

There were some issues with generic ITDs during the upgrade - we appear to be broken in some cases that ought to just work and it revealed a problem in that we can't parameterize ITDs as flexibly as we'd like.  So there is some infrastructure added (parameterizeX) methods in ResolvedMember and implementors.  See ResolvedMemberImpl.  However, after getting so far with this, it turned out it may clash with some other parameterization schemes and is really a deeper problem that should be tackled later.  So the code is there to look at - the beginnings of the proper fix - but it is not active right now.  Also see ReferenceType.getTypeMungers() which is where it would plug in.
Comment 1 Andrew Clement CLA 2008-01-16 19:53:27 EST 
The generic itd situation is related to Ajc150Tests.testSpuriousOverrideMethodWarning_pr119570_1 (and the other two tests relating to 119570)
Comment 2 Andrew Clement CLA 2008-03-19 18:46:39 EDT 
important - but no-one has noticed! defer to 1.6.1
Comment 3 Andrew Clement CLA 2008-09-30 15:47:09 EDT 
and still no-one notices ;)
Comment 4 Andrew Clement CLA 2008-12-04 20:28:25 EST 
*** Bug 223446 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Andrew Clement CLA 2008-12-04 20:29:12 EST 
*** Bug 247914 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Andrew Clement CLA 2013-06-24 11:07:03 EDT 
unsetting the target field which is currently set for something already released