Hi Peter,
this looks good to me (and enhancements to existing tests are
allowed even though we're in rampdown).
As you've also clarified that only behavior for annotations that javac
wouldn't have allowed in the first place have changed I retract my
reservations against the fix for 8029019 - but I hope with more
experience in the area can help out reviewing.
Thanks!
/Claes
On 2017-01-22 12:58, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
On 01/19/2017 04:58 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
I extended the AnnotationVerifier test with additional cases that
cover various "wrongs" in annotation types:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/8173056_AnnotationVerifier/webrev.01/
My plan is to 1st get this test in as a separate patch for the following
issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173056
..., so I would kindly ask for a review. This test will make any
possible further refactorings in annotation handling code less risky as
the exceptional behavior will be tracked by this test.
After the test is in, I will prepare a variant of fix for:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029019
... that doesn't change current exceptional behavior for invalid
annotation types or just changes it slightly to fix obvious conformance
bugs like the following:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169629
What behavior will or will not be changed will be directly visible from
the changes required to this test.
Regards, Peter
