On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 10:51:28 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Removing merge tags are noted on the review - thanks!
>
> Good experiment! I don't mind too much the fact that we have sets of
> incompatible flags - but while looking at the new Flags.java I noted several
> flags that looked *kind-specific* which seem to be defined in the *global*
> bucket. If (as I suspect) this is no accident, then I guess I'm a bit worried
> that the proposed patch would land us in a state where _some_ var flags are
> in the VarSymbolFlags enum, but not _all_ of them.
I'm also worried about where does this leave symbol construction - for
instance, in TypeEnter I now see these lines (unchanged in this patch):
params.add(new VarSymbol(
GENERATED_MEMBER | PARAMETER | RECORD | (field ==
lastField && lastIsVarargs ? Flags.VARARGS : 0),
field.name, field.sym.type, csym));
```
Here, it seems, we are forced to just use a flat flags mask in the constructor
- in other words, the new API is only for testing, and there is an asymmetry
between construction and testing.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2316
