288749 – Redundant superinterface not flagged inside one declaration

Bug 288749 - Redundant superinterface not flagged inside one declaration

Summary: Redundant superinterface not flagged inside one declaration

Status:	VERIFIED FIXED

Alias:	None

Product:	JDT
Classification:	Eclipse Project
Component:	Core (show other bugs)
Version:	3.6
Hardware:	PC Windows XP

Importance:	P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone:	3.6 M3
Assignee:	Kent Johnson
QA Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Duplicates (1):	294389 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2009-09-07 09:19 EDT by Markus Keller
Modified:	2009-11-05 17:13 EST (History)
CC List:	3 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Proposed fix (5.09 KB, patch) 2009-09-10 13:38 EDT, Olivier Thomann	no flags	Details \| Diff
Proposed fix (4.80 KB, patch) 2009-09-10 13:41 EDT, Olivier Thomann	no flags	Details \| Diff
Regression test (5.10 KB, patch) 2009-09-10 14:40 EDT, Olivier Thomann	no flags	Details \| Diff
Proposed patch and testcase (5.26 KB, patch) 2009-09-11 13:40 EDT, Kent Johnson	no flags	Details \| Diff
Proposed fix + regression test (5.90 KB, patch) 2009-10-02 10:05 EDT, Olivier Thomann	no flags	Details \| Diff
Show Obsolete (4) 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 Markus Keller

2009-09-07 09:19:07 EDT

HEAD - Redundant superinterface not flagged inside same declaration

import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.List;

public interface Mix<E> extends List<E>, Collection<E> {
}

abstract class AbstractMix implements List<Object>, Collection<Object> {
}

class MixList<E> extends ArrayList<E> implements List<E> {
}

abstract class A implements Runnable {}
abstract class B extends A implements Runnable {}

interface I {}
class X implements I {}
class Y extends X implements I {}


=> In the first 2 types, Collection<E> is not flagged as redundant, although it is. Rest is OK.

Comment 1 Olivier Thomann

2009-09-10 13:37:47 EDT

We only detect redundant super interfaces when they come from the superclass.

Comment 2 Olivier Thomann

2009-09-10 13:38:12 EDT

Created attachment 146887 [details]
Proposed fix

Comment 3 Olivier Thomann

2009-09-10 13:39:09 EDT

Kent, please review.
We might have a better place to make the detection.
If ok, I'll add some regression tests.

Comment 4 Olivier Thomann

2009-09-10 13:41:38 EDT

Created attachment 146888 [details]
Proposed fix

Same patch without two unused imports.

Comment 5 Olivier Thomann

2009-09-10 14:40:52 EDT

Created attachment 146899 [details]
Regression test

Comment 6 Kent Johnson

2009-09-11 13:40:10 EDT

Created attachment 146974 [details]
Proposed patch and testcase

Comment 7 Kent Johnson

2009-09-11 13:41:57 EDT

Released in HEAD for 3.6M2

Comment 8 Srikanth Sankaran

2009-09-15 02:18:48 EDT

Verified for 3.6M2 using I20090914-1800

Comment 9 Markus Keller

2009-10-02 09:36:39 EDT

Reopening, the fix is not good.

In I20090929-0800, I get problems on List, but it's not List that is redundant, it's Collection. In real life, I got compile errors after applying the quick fix for this problem in org.eclipse.jdt.internal.corext.fix.StringFix 1.18.

Comment 10 Olivier Thomann

2009-10-02 10:05:15 EDT

Created attachment 148645 [details]
Proposed fix + regression test

Kent, please review. I think the mistake only comes from the order of the parameters for the problem reporter method.

Comment 11 Kent Johnson

2009-10-02 11:04:07 EDT

Looks good - I screwed up & got the interfaces backwards in the call to the problem reporter.

Released to HEAD for 3.6M3

Comment 12 Srikanth Sankaran

2009-10-27 05:20:43 EDT

Screwed up with the verification for M1.

Verified for 3.6M3 using build I20091025-2000

Comment 13 Olivier Thomann

2009-11-05 17:13:41 EST

*** Bug 294389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***