[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14045823#comment-14045823
]
Lance commented on TAP5-1493:
-----------------------------
I just read Alexander Gavrilov's comment above. As he said, you should be able
to use
{code}Method.isBridge(){code}
And use the non-bridge method (instead of Modifiers.isVolatile(...) as i
suggested).
> Property expressions on properties that are covariant on a base class use the
> type of the base class property, not the covariant subclass
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAP5-1493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1493
> Project: Tapestry 5
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: tapestry-core, tapestry-ioc
> Affects Versions: 5.2
> Reporter: Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: month-of-tapestry
> Fix For: 5.4
>
>
> public abstract class AbstractFoo
> {
> public abstract AbstractBar getBar();
> }
> public class Foo extends AbstractFoo
> {
> public Bar getBar();
> }
> Here property bar is covariant; the subclass (Foo) changes the type of the
> return value (from AbstractBar to just Bar). Assuming that Bar is a subclass
> of AbstractBar, that's fine.
> The bug is that in this circumstance, the PropertyConduitSource sees the type
> of
> property "bar" of class Foo as AbstractBar, not Bar.
> Interestingly, a little debugging showed that the getter method for property
> bar was "public AbstractBar Foo.getBar()" ... in other words, much like with
> Generics, covariant return types may be largely
> a fiction of the compiler inserting the necessary casts in place.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
