On 26.05.16 14:46, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Okay, SUB foo=int property is discarded. But why SUB.setFoo(Long) is
discarded as well? Is it because it is treated as yet another foo=long
property but on the SUB level?
Sub foo=long is discarded in a step when we select foo=int, because we
cannot have the same property(foo) with a different types we should
select only one.
And why it is not discarded if I change SUB.setFoo(Integer) to
SUB.setFoo(String) for example? That seems very odd.
I assume because in this case instead of foo=int we will select foo=long
and will skip foo=String.
And before your fix there was no such behavior. You wrote that it was
random before the fix, but I ran the test may times and could not get
the same effect.
So I suppose it was introduced by the fix.
It means that when you run the app Class.getMethods() always return the
same order of methods. You can add a logging to the test attached to the
fix and run it on current jdk9, you will see that the type of foo
property is different time to time.
Also there is yet another problem here. The default interface methods
are totally ignored. This is probably a separate issue.
This is a known bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139193
--Semyon
In my opinion, the method may return any of this two (also a secondary
rank could be used), but not a mixture of them in any circumstances.
--Semyon
In my understanding, if I override the setter I should get the
over-ridden method for the top level class introspection. Otherwise
I do
not understand for what such introspector can be used:
I have some object which property I want to set, but using the
introspector for that I'm calling a wrong method which breaks the
inheritance and so corrupts the object state.
And moreover, if I reverse the situation and override the getter in
Sub
instead of setter :
class Super {
public void setFoo(Long i) {}
public Long getFoo() {return null;}
}
class Sub extends Super {
public Long getFoo() {return null;}
}
the introspector returns the over-ridden getter method for the
property :
type: class java.lang.Long
getter: public java.lang.Long Sub.getFoo()
setter: public void Super.setFoo(java.lang.Long)
This looks inconsistent.
--Semyon
On 5/25/2016 2:14 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 25.05.16 11:38, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
In this case the type of foo property will be Enum, before and
after
the fix. But the write method will be found only if this
method is
added to Sub, in other case the write method is recognized only
if we
remove all duplicates of set(xxx). Not sure is it intended
behavior in
jdk9 to skip such writers or not. I will file CR for that.
That maybe an another issue.
I dig to the history and found that it was done intentionally
when
JavaBean jep was implemented. but I filed
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8157828 for additional
investigation.
But the current fix need to be checked by
the scenario when there are several getters (over-ridden with
the
return
type substitutability) in addition to the setters.
Tescase is updated, the case: getE + multiple setE is added:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8156043/webrev.01/
On 5/17/2016 3:20 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello.
Please review the fix for jdk9.
We have a number of bugs which state that our JavaBeans
randomly
does
not work, examples: JDK-6807471[1] , JDK-6788525[2], the
reason is
that the order of methods from Class.getMethods() is not
specified.
So I propose to fix this bug totally and sort the methods in
some
order. Note that the resulted list is cached, and we sort the
list
only the once.
The code partly was copied from
com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.MethodOrder
[3], but the parameters check and the order for return values
were
changed. After this fix our bugs(if any) can be easily
reproduced.
[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6807471
[2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6788525
[3]
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/file/fb38b0925915/src/java.management/share/classes/com/sun/jmx/mbeanserver/MBeanAnalyzer.java
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8156043
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8156043/webrev.00
--
Best regards, Sergey.
