Stub limitations with Inner Classes #570
Conversation
| or | ||
| \begin{Verbatim} | ||
| ProcessBuilder redirectError(@NonNull Redirect destination) | ||
| \end{Verbatim} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it possible to write the parameter's type as "ProcessBuilder.Redirect"? Showing that example, or explaining that it is not permitted to be written, would be helpful.
|
@mernst I committed the fix you asked for. |
…work into stub-limitations
|
Looks good. Merge when tests pass. |
| \item | ||
| Annotations on types that are inner classes must be written before the | ||
| package if the type is written as a | ||
| fully annotated type, or before the inner class name if the type is |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should the "fully annotated type" be "fully qualified type"?
| Annotations on types that are inner classes must be written before the | ||
| package if the type is written as a | ||
| fully-qualified type, or before the inner class name if the type is | ||
| written as a simple type. For example, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Werner says (the comment got wiped out because of a subsequent commit):
Can we mark the cases in the manual that violate Java 8 syntax, to highlight the discrepancies to source code?
Also, for each such mismatch, can we file an issue against the stub parser and reference the issue here.
(In Java 8 syntax, the example should be java.lang.ProcessBuilder.@nonnull Redirect.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we mark the cases in the manual that violate Java 8 syntax, to highlight the discrepancies to source code?
All of the stub file limitations listed in this section are violations of Java 8 syntax.
Also, for each such mismatch, can we file an issue against the stub parser and reference the issue here.
Since the right way to fix all of these limitations is to update the version of the JavaParser used by the stub parser, I don't think it makes sense to file an issue for each individual limitation. Though we could file one that says "update JavaParser".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All of the stub file limitations listed in this section are violations of Java 8 syntax.
Sure, but it might be clearer if the manual states that more explicitly.
I hadn't realized that replacing all of the StubParser was your plan. If so, I agree that having one issue is enough.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This sounds like a good resolution to me.
It definitely isn't worth fixing any StubParser problems without updating to the latest version.
I thought that was generally agreed upon plan for fixing these limitations. It's not something on my agenda at the moment. |
Stub limitations with Inner Classes
Clarifies/adds limitations as discussed in Issue #568.