Improve BytecodeRecorderImpl error message #17317
Conversation
gsmet
added
the
triage/waiting-for-ci
|
This workflow status is outdated as a new workflow run has been triggered. Failing Jobs - Building 89cef88
Full information is available in the Build summary check run. Test Failures⚙️ JVM Tests - JDK 11 #📦 core/deployment✖ ⚙️ JVM Tests - JDK 11 Windows #📦 core/deployment✖ ⚙️ JVM Tests - JDK 16 #📦 core/deployment✖ ⚙️ Maven Tests - JDK 11 #📦 integration-tests/maven✖ ✖ ✖ 📦 integration-tests/maven/target/test-classes/projects/qit-fast-jar✖ 📦 integration-tests/maven/target/test-classes/projects/qit-legacy-jar✖ 📦 integration-tests/maven/target/test-classes/projects/qit-uber-jar✖ ⚙️ Maven Tests - JDK 11 Windows #📦 integration-tests/maven✖ ✖ ✖ 📦 integration-tests/maven/target/test-classes/projects/qit-fast-jar✖ 📦 integration-tests/maven/target/test-classes/projects/qit-legacy-jar✖ 📦 integration-tests/maven/target/test-classes/projects/qit-uber-jar✖ |
| if (ctorParamIndex == null | ||
| && i.getReadMethod().getReturnType() != i.getWriteMethod().getParameterTypes()[0]) { | ||
| Class<?> getterReturnType = i.getReadMethod().getReturnType(); | ||
| Class<?> setterParameterType = i.getWriteMethod().getParameterTypes()[0]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CI seems to indicate that you need to be more defensive in these.
I am assuming it used to work because the expression was short-circuited by the first check in the if statement
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I'm already working on it.
When getter type and setter type do not match, provide a better error message with as much information as possible.
gsmet
force-pushed
the
improve-bytecoderecorder-error-message
branch
from
89cef88
to
ac5ea4e
Compare
quarkus-bot
bot
removed
the
triage/waiting-for-ci
When getter type and setter type do not match, provide a better error
message with as much information as possible.
This is related to #16954 .