> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 16:29:31 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
> It looks like you might be counting the "here via invocation" lines as
> separate warnings. These are really part of the previous `possible 'this'
> escape` line, e.g.:
yes, I really did the simplest possible thing (e.g. just counting
On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 12:51:49 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> The number of times around any single loop is bounded by the number of new
>> references that can possibly be created during the analysis of that loop.
>>
>> That number is at most 2 * (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + N) where N is the number of
On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 11:53:40 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Fix bug where field initializer warnings could be incorrectly suppressed.
>> - Consolidate all the unit
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 21:28:51 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 1088:
>>
>>> 1086: private void visitLooped(T tree, Consumer
>>> visitor) {
>>> 1087: visitScoped(tree, false, t -> {
>>> 1088:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 22:48:59 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 00:57:14 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> Ok - I thought false negative was the thing to absolutely avoid - and that
>> was the no. 1 concern. I think a possible approach to keep both the
>> filtering and the code more or less similar to what you have, is to save the
>> type
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 21:33:02 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> Sounds good - thanks.
>
> Ah. I just realized that we need to do it your way because of the following
> bug:
>
> Suppose you have a constructor and a field with initializer that both leak,
> but you have
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 16:20:41 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> I'm OK either way we can revisit this later either as part of this PR or in
>> a future one. I let it to your consideration
>
> Sounds good - thanks.
Ah. I just realized that we need to do it your way because of the following bug:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 20:21:24 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with three
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use more idiomatic test for java.lang.Object.
>> - Revert 27cb30129; the error was actually fixed in
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 20:16:25 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with three
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use more idiomatic test for java.lang.Object.
>> - Revert 27cb30129; the error was actually fixed in
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 19:09:54 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 19:09:54 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 17:49:05 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 685:
>>
>>> 683:
>>> 684: @Override
>>> 685: public void visitDoLoop(JCDoWhileLoop tree) {
>>
>> I was thinking, code can also loop
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 17:35:08 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with 16
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Fix bug where all but the last yeild statement were being ignored.
>> - Add method RefSet.mapInto() and use to
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 04:04:36 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 16:12:50 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Yes... I did it that way is so that it doesn't require any adaptation
>> if/when JDK-8194743 ever gets implemented. And it keeps the code a little
>> simpler in exchange for a little redundancy.
>>
>> I'm happy to fix this if you
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 16:06:04 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>>> Something seems to be up with the lint description for this-escape -
>>> compare this:
>>
>> Oops, will fix - thanks.
>
>> The decision was to go with drawing the "warning boundary" at the
>> compilation unit. The reasoning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 15:14:05 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 516:
>>
>>> 514: Name name = TreeInfo.name(invoke.meth);
>>> 515: if (name == names._super) {
>>> 516:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 15:08:59 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>>> I guess I was confused because, while subclasses are a particularly sneaky
>>> case where uninitialized values can show up, the above leak seems
>>> potentially dangerous as well...
>>
>> Yes - and this very question did come up in
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 12:42:24 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with 16
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Fix bug where all but the last yeild statement were being ignored.
>> - Add method RefSet.mapInto() and use to
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 15:08:43 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> Something seems to be up with the lint description for this-escape - compare
>> this:
>>
>>
>> serial Warn about Serializable classes that do not have a
>> serialVersionUID field.
>> Also
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 11:08:33 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Perhaps my confusion might come from the name `this-escape` of the lint
>> warning - which seems overpromising in this respect. But I looked at the
>> description of the lint warning using `javac --help-lint` and I got this:
>>
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 04:04:36 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 04:04:36 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 10:58:33 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Caring about the proper initialization of any class in the _current_
>> compilation unit is an explicit non-goal.
>>
>> We only care about bugs where a superclass and subclass are in separate
>> compilation units.
>
> So, to
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 11:05:51 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> So, to clarify, in this case:
>>
>>
>> import java.util.*;
>>
>> class B {
>> final Object ref;
>>
>> private B(Object ref) {
>> Foo.consume(this);
>> this.ref = ref;
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>>
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 21:04:09 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> but what if `m` is a static method in a separate compilation unit? Should it
>> be able to observe a partially initialized Foo?
>
> Caring about the proper initialization of any class in the _current_
> compilation unit is an explicit
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 21:47:28 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> Ok - I thought false negative was the thing to absolutely avoid - and that
> was the no. 1 concern.
You're right. I think at the time I reasoned that it would be unusual enough
for the type of an expression to start as an
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 19:12:27 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> Uhm. Turns out I probably did not understand the filter correctly, and now
>> I'm more dubious about what it actually does. Say you have this hierarchy:
>>
>>
>> interface A { }
>> class B {
>> B() {
>> A a = (A)this;
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 21:28:12 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> My point is about who puts ThisRef in the set to begin with. It seems to me
>> that ThisRef is put there at the start of a method analysis. After which,
>> there's several code points where we say "if there's a direct ThisRef in the
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 19:01:10 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> The code you quoted has nothing specifically to do with method invocations.
>> This code is simply handing the evaluation of the expressions `this` and
>> `super`. For example, `this` could just be a parameter we're passing to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 19:24:50 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This patch passes all tests:
>>
>>
>> diff --git
>> a/src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>>
>> b/src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> index
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 18:48:25 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>>> I guess what I'm thinking about:
>>
>> No leak is possible in that example.
>> * `new Foo()` creates an instance of `Foo` (not a subclass of `Foo`)
>> therefore `m()` is not overridden
>> * Any subclass of `Foo` that may exist
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 18:40:38 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> This patch:
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/make/test/BuildMicrobenchmark.gmk
>> b/make/test/BuildMicrobenchmark.gmk
>> index 1c89328a388..7c3f0293edc 100644
>> --- a/make/test/BuildMicrobenchmark.gmk
>> +++
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:40:36 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> But the filtering will end up dropping the expression Ref on the floor,
> right? (because B and A are unrelated).
Ah, I see what you mean.
Here's a more complete example:
public class CastLeak {
public CastLeak() {
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:33:48 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 875:
>>
>>> 873: // Reference to this?
>>> 874: if (tree.name == names._this || tree.name == names._super) {
>>> 875:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:29:22 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> I put it there because of switch expressions and `yeild`... ?
>
> Well, yield can... yield a value - `case` doesn't. So I'm confused. Also
> because the variable is called `referenceExpressionNode` and `CASE` is not an
>
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 18:37:06 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> I guess what I'm thinking about:
>>
>> class Foo {
>> private Foo() {
>> m(this);
>> }
>>
>> public void m() { ... } // overridable
>>
>> static Foo makeFoo() { return new Foo(); }
>> }
>
>> I guess
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 18:18:38 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> I can't seem to be able to run tests - I get failures in the build:
>>
>>
>> * For target support_test_micro_tools-classes__the.BUILD_INDIFY_batch:
>
> This patch:
>
>
> diff --git a/make/test/BuildMicrobenchmark.gmk
>
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:40:33 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> I guess what I'm thinking about:
No leak is possible in that example.
* `new Foo()` creates an instance of `Foo` (not a subclass of `Foo`) therefore
`m()` is not overridden
* Any subclass of `Foo` that may exist in the outside
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 18:11:01 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Same comment as previous: I don't quite know what I'm doing and I'm loathe
>> to break what is already working. Do you have a suggested patch?
>
> I can't seem to be able to run tests - I get failures in the build:
>
>
> * For
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:28:12 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> This might also be related with the fact that we deal with return values in
> different ways than with e.g. values returned from a nested scope (where we
> just pop, and then copy all pending expression to the outer depth).
Yes,
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:48:37 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 909:
>>
>>> 907:
>>> 908: // Check for implicit outer 'this' reference
>>> 909: if
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:39:05 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to clarify how
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:26:27 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> Do we really need a set for this?
There are surely other ways to model things. But I got myself really confused
trying to build more complicated models.
What I ended up with is this simple model that works:
* There is a set of
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:17:32 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> There is a concept of push/popScope and then there's a separate concept of
> call stack (which is just a list of diagnostic position up to the point). I
> wonder if this could be better modeled by using a single class e.g.
>
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:15:17 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 11:09:35 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:13:55 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 411:
>>
>>> 409: final boolean referenceExpressionNode;
>>> 410: switch (tree.getTag()) {
>>> 411: case CASE:
>>
>>
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 03:30:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:56:53 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:48:49 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:20:12 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 218:
>>
>>> 216: new TreeScanner() {
>>> 217:
>>> 218: private Lint lint = ThisEscapeAnalyzer.this.lint;
>>
>> On a first
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:32:19 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> If we have a class with a private constructor and public static factory
> invoking said constructor, and the constructor makes this escape, isn't that
> an issue we should detect?
A static factory method will not create a
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:25:27 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:18:27 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 15:10:19 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> Interesting example - I thought you might have been referring to a case where
> the class being analyzed was itself an exception.
Yes - although that example doesn't compile (oops!). Just replace `catch
(RuntimeException e)` with
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 13:01:44 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Use the more appropriate Type comparison method Types.isSameType().
>> - Add some more comments to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 14:59:12 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>>> * On the Java stack
>>> (a) The current 'this' instance
>>> (b) A method parameter
>>> (c) A local variable
>>> (d) A temporary value that is part of the current expression being
>>> evaluated
>>> (e) The return value from a
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 09:57:00 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean by (1f). You mean this can be embedded in an
> exception being thrown? Is that different from (2)?
Yes, this would be a different case from any other that you'd have to handle in
the code if you wanted
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 03:30:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 03:30:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 03:30:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 02:14:10 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>>>
>>> D'oh, you're right. But if you made `returnMe()` static or private then the
>>> argument would still hold.
>>>
>>> > And, if the method is static, same story - you are passing ref3 somewhere
>>> > else, and ref3 potentially
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 00:15:08 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> So, for static methods, it could go down two ways: either we don't even look
> at referenced method bodies, give up and just declare "sorry, escaping". Or,
> if we look into method bodies, and see that the relationship between
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 22:40:43 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>
> D'oh, you're right. But if you made `returnMe()` static or private then the
> argument would still hold.
>
> > And, if the method is static, same story - you are passing ref3 somewhere
> > else, and ref3 potentially contains this.
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 21:51:45 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> So, in this example though you are calling an instance method before the
> object is initialized, which would seem to me like a leak
D'oh, you're right. But if you made `returnMe()` static or private then the
argument would still
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 21:45:20 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Regarding the assignment graph approach, I think that would work if the
>> references are bouncing around strictly between variables, but what if the
>> chain includes any of the more complicated stuff that is currently being
>>
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 19:10:04 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> Good idea. Looks like the difference is in the noise, at least on my Macbook:
>>
>> Builds of master (jdk-21+3-69-gc6588d5bb3f)
>> ==
>>
>> Build times:
>>
>> real 2m24.650s
>> user
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 03:30:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 15:59:29 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> What I'm interested in though is what incremental improvement is brought by
> the more complex analysis you have in this PR?
It's a good question. Here are some thoughts...
One meta-goal is that this analysis be conservative. In
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 18:44:20 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> Also, looking at the loop test more closely, it seems to me that what the
>> compiler needs to do is to prove that there can be possible paths by which a
>> `this` can land into ref4.
>>
>> If we build a graph of all the assignments,
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 16:14:24 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> True - probably 3 * 3 can be achieved if this:
>>
>>
>> ThisEscapeLoop ref21 = ref14;
>>
>> Is replaced with
>>
>>
>> ThisEscapeLoop ref21 = this;
>>
>>
>> In which case the inner loop won't converge immediately
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 14:12:46 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Actually I think it would take 1 + 1 + 3 iterations.
>>
>> During the first two iterations of the outer loop, nothing changes after the
>> first go round of the inner loop - i.e., the total set of possible
>> references in
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 03:30:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 00:22:03 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> So, if the code was be like this:
>>
>>
>> ThisEscapeLoop ref11 = this;
>> ThisEscapeLoop ref12 = null;
>> ThisEscapeLoop ref13 = null;
>> ThisEscapeLoop ref14 = null;
>> for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
>> ref14 = ref13;
>>
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 23:38:14 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> OK I'm glad you pointed that out because I'm a little unclear on the best
>> way to do this bit.
>>
>> Just to confirm, you are saying that this:
>>
>> `if (erasure(type).equalsIgnoreMetadata(outerType)) {`
>>
>> should be
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 00:04:14 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Yes, because the 'this' reference can bounce around through different
>> variables in scope each time around the loop. So we have to repeat the loop
>> until all 'this' references have "flooded" into all the nooks and crannies.
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:20:35 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 1098:
>>
>>> 1096: private void visitLooped(T tree, Consumer
>>> visitor) {
>>> 1097: this.visitScoped(tree, false, t -> {
>>> 1098:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 23:45:59 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> It's slightly different from that.
>>
>> Considering any of the various things in scope that can point to an object
>> (these are: the current 'this' instance, the current outer 'this' instance,
>> method parameter/variable,
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:18:04 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/ThisEscapeAnalyzer.java
>> line 85:
>>
>>> 83: *
>>> 84: *
>>> 85: * When tracking references, we distinguish between direct references
>>> and indirect references,
>>
>>
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:42:06 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/code/Types.java line 2345:
>>
>>> 2343: if (!innerType.hasTag(CLASS) || !outerType.hasTag(CLASS))
>>> 2344: return false;
>>> 2345: innerType =
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 15:03:10 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Archie L. Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix incorrect @bug numbers in unit tests.
>
>
On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 21:08:07 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 06:37:22 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> All your new files need a copyright and GPL header.
Sorry if I'm being blind but I'm not seeing it. Which file(s) are you referring
to?
The `@test /nodynamiccopyright/` files don't get one per
On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 21:08:07 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 18:03:04 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> I don't think the implementation notes should be included as part of the
> adding the lint warning as I think it creates an attractive nuisance.
I agree with you - not only for that reason, but also because as others have
pointed out the
On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 23:08:27 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
> I've moved the `@SuppressWarnings` annotations onto a new branch
> `ThisEscapeAnnotations`. This is just for future reference in case somebody
> wants to add them back someday and doesn't want to start from scratch.
>
> > I suspect
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 23:13:09 GMT, Archie L. Cobbs wrote:
>> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>>
>> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
>> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>>
>> A 'this' escape warning is
On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 15:38:31 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>> The associated JBS issue has been dormant for 6+ years and this is a very
>>> intrusive change affecting many, many files. Has the resurrection of this
>>> project previously been discussed somewhere?
>>
>> Hi @dholmes-ora,
>>
>> The
> This PR adds a new lint warning category `this-escape`.
>
> It also adds `@SuppressWarnings` annotations as needed to the JDK itself to
> allow the JDK to continue to compile with `-Xlint:all`.
>
> A 'this' escape warning is generated for a constructor `A()` in a class `A`
> when the
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
