Bug 322880 - Cannot add breakpoint
Summary: Cannot add breakpoint
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 321276
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 3.5   Edit
Hardware: All All
: P3 major (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Olivier Thomann CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-08-17 04:32 EDT by Dani Megert CLA
Modified: 2010-09-02 12:32 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

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 Dani Megert CLA 2010-08-17 04:32:07 EDT 
R3.6 but also 3.5.x.

Filing against JDT Core because there seem to be other issues with that member which probably also cause the breakpoint problem.

1. start new workspace with Oracle/Sun 1.6 SDK
2. add a Java project
3. open 'FutureTask'
4. in the Outline view click on the constructor 'Sync(Callable<V>)'
   ==> nothing happens (NOTE: the constructor is not synthetic)
5. go back to the editor and try to add a breakpoint to that constructor
   ==> nothing happens

It works for other members inside the Sync class.

Problem is that org.eclipse.jdt.core.ISourceReference.getSourceRange() returns [offset=-1, length=0].

See also bug 137847.
Comment 1 Dani Megert CLA 2010-08-17 04:33:07 EDT 
I only checked back to 3.5, so it might also be broken before that.
Comment 3 Srikanth Sankaran CLA 2010-08-18 00:09:17 EDT 
Reproduced with JDK 7b100 also.

Mismatch in hashCode computation at the time of
hash map put vs get due to synthetic argument
being counted in one and being ignored in the
other. Need to check why.
Comment 4 Srikanth Sankaran CLA 2010-08-23 07:59:51 EDT 
(In reply to comment #3)
> Reproduced with JDK 7b100 also.
> 
> Mismatch in hashCode computation at the time of
> hash map put vs get due to synthetic argument
> being counted in one and being ignored in the
> other. Need to check why.

See also bug 316937 comment 5
Comment 5 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-08-31 15:00:09 EDT 
We have an inconsistency for parameter types for a binary method that comes from a constructor with a generic signature. The generic signature doesn't contain the enclosing instance. So we must "insert" the enclosing instance in this case.
Working on a fix.
Comment 6 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-09-02 12:32:41 EDT 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 321276 ***