Bug 82772 - [1.5][compiler] CHEETAH: Compiler confused about whether or not implements java.awt.EventListener required
Summary: [1.5][compiler] CHEETAH: Compiler confused about whether or not implements ja...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 3.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows 2000
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.1 M5   Edit
Assignee: JDT-Core-Inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-01-13 13:52 EST by Bill Evans CLA
Modified: 2005-01-14 10:19 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Bill Evans CLA 2005-01-13 13:52:54 EST
Sun 1.5.0 JDK and Cheetah 0.6 plug-in. 

I have a simple class that extends JFrame and implements ActionListener.

The first time I compiled it in 1.5, it complained:

"The return type is incompatible with Container.getListeners(Class<T>), Window.
 getListeners(Class<T>)"

It doesn't think my class implements EventListener (eventhough ActionListener is
itself an EventListener), so I add it in. Then, I do 'Project->Clean..' and all
is Ok.

HOWEVER, if I clean again, I get the same compilation error. This time I REMOVE
the implements EventListener and do another clean and it is Ok. Cleaning again
produces the error, and so on!! A kind of annoying toggling problem!

Any comments?
Comment 1 Bill Evans CLA 2005-01-13 13:57:44 EST
Ok... the behavior I described isn't 100% accurate. Reality is:

- The compile error actually gets removed on SAVING changes.
- It reappears everytime a full project compile happens.
Comment 2 Olivier Thomann CLA 2005-01-13 14:06:41 EST
Cheetah is completely out of date.
Please use the latest integration build to test 1.5 support. The 1.5 support is
only for the 3.1 branch since it has been merged into HEAD.
Comment 3 Philipe Mulet CLA 2005-01-14 05:55:46 EST
As indicated, the Cheetah code base got merged into 3.1 development stream, and
improved significantly. Therefore this defect is likely obsolete.

Please try to reproduce in a recent 3.1 delivery (3.1M4 or better); and reopen
with steps if you still see a problem.
Comment 4 Bill Evans CLA 2005-01-14 10:19:20 EST
Fixed with version 3.1

Thanks!