Bug 329998 - [content assist] override method proposal in anonymous class inserts bad stub
Summary: [content assist] override method proposal in anonymous class inserts bad stub
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 3.7   Edit
Hardware: All All
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.7 M4   Edit
Assignee: Olivier Thomann CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-11-11 09:33 EST by Markus Keller CLA
Modified: 2010-12-07 05:22 EST (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Proposed fix + regression test (4.36 KB, patch)
2010-11-15 13:04 EST, Olivier Thomann CLA 		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 Markus Keller CLA 2010-11-11 09:33:04 EST 
HEAD

Have this example:

public class Try {
    Object field;

    void foo() {
        field= new Object() {
            hash
        };
    }

    void bar() {
        Object var= new Object() {
            hash
        };
    }
}

Content assist after the first "hash" inserts:

            public int hashCode() {};

Expected: Same as proposal at second "hash" (formatted, calls super method).

See also bug 317497, bug 246343 for similar problems.
Comment 1 Dani Megert CLA 2010-11-15 08:52:02 EST 
This looks like a bug in JDT Core's NodeFinder: in the first case it returns the ExpressionStatement but in the second/correct one, it correctly returns the AnonymousClassDeclaration node. Also, if I remove "hash", do code assist and then select 'hashCode', it also works fine.
Comment 2 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-11-15 12:34:25 EST 
The problem comes from the positions (start/length) of the assignment node are wrong. They don't include the anonymous type declaration.
This is easily visible using the ASTView and double-clicking on the assignment node. Only "field= new Object()" is selected.
This is related to the syntax error recovery. Positions are fine if the code doesn't contain syntax errors.
Investigating.
Comment 3 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-11-15 13:04:34 EST 
Created attachment 183147 [details]
Proposed fix + regression test
Comment 4 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-11-15 14:22:31 EST 
Released for 3.7M4.
Comment 5 Jay Arthanareeswaran CLA 2010-12-07 05:22:54 EST 
Verified for 3.7M4 using build I20101206-1800