On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 06:50:47 GMT, Jan Lahoda <jlah...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This PR proposes to improve handling of javac's `Flags` in two ways: >> - for each flag, there's now an informational annotation specifying what is >> the target Symbol type. Only targets right now are `TypeSymbol`s, >> `MethodSymbol`s and `VarSymbol`s. If we ran out of flags for `TypeSymbol`s, >> we could split those to module/package/class/type variable, but it does not >> seem to be quite necessary yet. There's an auxiliary special `BLOCK`, which >> is for `JCBlock`. >> - the manually handled `Flags.Flag` enum is replaced with autogenerated >> `FlagsEnum` >> >> This is inspired by: >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/26181#pullrequestreview-2997428662 >> >> There may be some better to handle `Flags` eventually, but this hopefully >> improves the current situation at least somewhat, by providing more formal >> way to say the flags' target, and restricting the need to read comments and >> search for free flags. >> >> As a side-effect of this annotation, the >> `test/langtools/tools/javac/flags/FlagsTest.java` now also prints which >> flags are free, for each Symbol type. >> >> (I will remove the `build` label for now, until discussion on javac level is >> done, and will re-add it if we decide the goal to autogenerate the FlagsEnum >> makes sense.) > > Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Reverting runtime checks, as suggested. Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer). make/modules/jdk.compiler/Gensrc.gmk line 79: > 77: > 78: > ################################################################################ > 79: Can remove one of these comment delimiter lines. ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26452#pullrequestreview-3080147875 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26452#discussion_r2248577111
