-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
8337976: Insufficient error recovery in parser for switch inside class body #20526
Conversation
…s body, and missing name in parameterized type
👋 Welcome back jlahoda! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@lahodaj This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:
You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 113 new commits pushed to the
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details. ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
Webrevs
|
|
||
private boolean isDefiniteStatementStartToken() { | ||
return switch (token.kind) { | ||
case IF, WHILE, DO, SWITCH, RETURN, TRY, FOR, ASSERT, BREAK, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should yield
, synchronized
be included?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
synchronized
may be part of an method declaration (synchronized void t() {}
). For yield
, even though yield
cannot be used as a type name, I thought it would be better to let the rest of error recovery mechanisms to handle it, hopefully producing some sensible error in more cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
/integrate |
Going to push as commit fbe4f05.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
Consider this code:
When trying to compile this, javac crashes:
The problem is that while parsing a the class body, javac will try to parse a type (as a type of a field or method), but finds the switch. Which will get parsed as an expression, and used as the type of the field
f
. This then crashes type annotation validation, but generally does not make much sense.The proposal here is to check if there's a token that inevitably is a start of a statement used inside a class (or interface, enum, annotation type or record), and if yes, parse the input as a statement.
As a result, the parser tolerates statements inside a class body. The statement's tree is wrapped inside an
ErroneousTree
, so that it is obvious it is not a correct AST.The attribution is also tweaked a bit to handle the augmented AST better.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/20526/head:pull/20526
$ git checkout pull/20526
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/20526
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/20526/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 20526
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 20526
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20526.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment