Bug 487391 - [compiler][1.8] detect super type cycle due to new rule in JLS
Summary: [compiler][1.8] detect super type cycle due to new rule in JLS
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 4.6   Edit
Hardware: PC Linux
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: JDT-Core-Inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard: stalebug
Keywords: helpwanted
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-02-06 12:31 EST by Stephan Herrmann CLA
Modified: 2022-06-02 14:00 EDT (History)
2 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 Stephan Herrmann CLA 2016-02-06 12:31:36 EST 

    


    


      



        
          Comment 1
        

        
          Stephan Herrmann CLA

        

        
        

        
          2016-02-06 12:35:34 EST
        

      






https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041994 defines a new kind of dependency, which needs to be implemented for cycle detection.

The spec addition is 

"A class C directly depends on a type T if T is mentioned in the extends or implements clause of C either as a superclass or superinterface, or as a qualifier +++in the fully qualified form+++ of a superclass or superinterface name."

    


    


      



        
          Comment 2
        

        
          Manoj N Palat CLA

        

        
        

        
          2018-05-16 12:56:34 EDT
        

      






bulk move out of 4.8

    


    


      



        
          Comment 3
        

        
          Manoj N Palat CLA

        

        
        

        
          2018-08-16 00:08:05 EDT
        

      






Bulk move out of 4.9

    


    


      



        
          Comment 4
        

        
          Eclipse Genie CLA

        

        
        

        
          2022-06-02 14:00:02 EDT
        

      






This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.

--
The automated Eclipse Genie.