SI-4788 Respect RetentionPolicy of Java annotations #3459
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Review by @retronym and @xeno-by please, especially regarding:
Comments and opinions appreciated. |
| private def isRuntimeVisible(annot: AnnotationInfo) = { | ||
| annot.atp.typeSymbol.annotations | ||
| .find(annot => annot.matches(AnnotationRetentionAttr)) | ||
| .exists(annotRet => annotRet.assocs.contains((TermName("value") -> LiteralAnnotArg(Constant(AnnotationRetentionPolicyRuntimeValue))))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use nme.value.
Every call to TermName(...) has to intern, that's why we cache commonly used names. Additionally, it's good to be able to find all usages of nme.value and find spots in the compiler that use that name.
|
@retronym Added tests. |
|
PLS REBUILD/pr-scala@ec9b8c9 |
|
(kitty-note-to-self: ignore 34027767) |
| annot.matches(ClassfileAnnotationClass) && | ||
| retentionPolicyOf(annot) != AnnotationRetentionPolicySourceValue && | ||
| annot.args.isEmpty && | ||
| !annot.matches(DeprecatedAttr) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh interesting, so DeprecatedAttr is java-defined?
No, but deprecation needs to be treated differently, see http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se7/html/jvms-4.html#jvms-4.7.15.
Yes, the code feels like it has too many checks here, I'll investigate.
|
PLS REBUILD/pr-scala@4d698ca |
|
(kitty-note-to-self: ignore 34145783) |
|
For god's sake ... is stuff broken again? |
Looks like a connectivity problem to Github. If it persists, I'll contact the sysadmin at EPFL to see if its on their network. PLS REBUILD ALL |
|
(kitty-note-to-self: ignore 34155799) |
|
PLS REBUILD ALL |
|
(kitty-note-to-self: ignore 34279298) |
|
Sigh |
|
When compiling with I have absolutely no idea what's happening here. |
|
@retronym Any idea what's happening here? |
|
Build yourself a new locker to workaround: You might also need to rebase this onto master. |
|
@retronym Mhhh, do you mean versions.properties? |
Also closes SI-5420 and SI-5948.
|
Build.properties is an optional file that can contain local ant properties. On Monday, February 10, 2014, soc notifications@github.com wrote:
|
|
@soc: what's the status of this? |
|
@gkossakowski I'm slowly losing my mind. With @retronym's change, it at least compiles locally, but now suddenly the compiler pretends that the elements annotated with Scala annotations don't exist anymore. |
|
Huh, that's strange indeed. In any case, I think we'll need to push this to 2.11.1 (if the change retains binary compatibility) or 2.12. Please reopen once we are done with 2.11.0 RCs. |
|
@gkossakowski Alright, no problem. I will look into it as soon as trunk is a bit more stable again (doesn't make sense if I get it to run locally, but PR validation still fails ...) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Also closes SI-5420 and SI-5948.