Thanks, I'll send an inline version this evening. I have written a couple of reproducers for these issues. Should I add them to jtreg and also send them as an inline patch?
I'll submit the CSR tonight, too. Thanks for the pointers! Best regards, Rafael David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> schrieb am Di., 23. Juli 2019, 06:10: > Hi Rafael, > > A couple of comments on process here ... > > On 23/07/2019 6:48 am, Rafael Winterhalter wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I have created a patch such that getReceiverType() returns a > parameterized > > type if the receiver type declaration is itself generic. Currently, the > > receiver type is always a type representation of Class such that > > annotations on the type variables or the receiver type's owner type > cannot > > be resolved: > https://gist.github.com/raphw/a155d5ef66d11e5fb131b7e6b8fb10e5 > > All OpenJDK contributions must be provided via OpenJDK infrastructure, > so either direct code in an email to a mailing list (attachments usually > get stripped), or a webrev hosted on cr.openjdk.java.net (available > directly to Authors else find someone to host for you). Links to github > are not acceptable at this time. > > > Note that this change can potentially break existing code if callers of > the > > method expect this behavior for parameterized receiver types. However, > > without this change, the type information is lost and I would argue that > > the current behavior can be considered to be incorrect. > > That argument needs to be made via a Compatibility and Specification > Review (CSR) request: > > https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/csr/Main > > Cheers, > David > > > Best regards, Rafael > > >
