Review request: update javac to properly output mandated parameters in MethodParameters attributes (original) (raw)

Alex Buckley alex.buckley at oracle.com
Thu Feb 7 15:46:31 PST 2013

Pretty sure SYNTHETIC was meant for these invisible things, versus the extra parameters which represented MANDATED things.

(Thus proving that using both "synthetic" and "synthesized" was a bad idea, since it's easy to use one where the other was meant.)

Alex

On 2/7/2013 2:47 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:

SYNTHESIZED?

-- Jon

On 02/07/2013 02:45 PM, Eric McCorkle wrote: Okay this will indeed necessitate some modifications.

VarSymbols only seem to get created for the formal (explicitly declared) parameters. I had assumed (incorrectly, it seems) that SYNTHESIZED parameters also got VarSymbols, and the extra parameters in externalType represent MANDATED parameters. It seems the thing to do is to mark all the extra parameters SYNTHESIZED, unless they match certain cases, in which case they get marked MANDATED. If there is a better way to do this in javac, then please let me know. On 02/07/13 17:06, Alex Buckley wrote: On 2/7/2013 12:29 PM, maurizio cimadamore wrote: It would seem that the spec is not defining (on top of my head - there are probably others):

*) (effectively) final variables passed in to inner classes (javac only does that for reference-types as others are just constants that can be produced on the stack at will) Right. The JLS does not say that those ctor parameters are implicitly declared. javac should mark them with ACCSYNTHETIC. *) I believe javac's generated enum constructor has an additional parameter accepting the ordinal We need to be clear what we're talking abut here. For an enum type, JLS 8.9.2 has always implicitly declared a default ctor with no formal parameters - but that ctor is required to be private, so no other compiler can emit code which uses it. I think you're talking not about the default ctor, but about an explicitly-declared ctor to which javac adds a parameter. In this case, is code from another compiler expected to use the parameter to construct the enum instance correctly? If yes, then the ordinal parameter should be implicitly declared. Please let me know so I can update the JLS. In any case, the implementation problem remains: it doesn't distinguish between impl-only parameters and 'implicitly declared' ones. It just takes all parameters that do not have a correspondent in the source code and put them in the same place. I hope Eric is out there somewhere :-) Alex

More information about the compiler-dev mailing list