On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 20:24:33 GMT, Vicente Romero <vrom...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with six additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Fixing infinite loop where a binding pattern is replaced with a binding
>> pattern for the same type.
>> - Reflecting review comments.
>> - Fixing exhaustiveness for unsealed supertype pattern.
>> - No need to enable features after error reported.
>> - SwitchBootstraps.typeSwitch should not initialize enum classes.
>> - A prototype of avoiding enum initialization.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/runtime/SwitchBootstraps.java line 94:
>
>> 92: * <li>the element is of type {@code String} or {@code Integer} and
>> 93: * equals to the target.</li>
>> 94: * <li>the element is of type {@code EnumDesc}, that describes a
>> constant that is
>
> I think that at ~line 76, up in this same javadoc you need to add a reference
> to EnumDesc in the general description. Where it says:
>
>
> The static arguments are an array of case labels which must be non-null and
> of type
> {@code String} or {@code Integer} or {@code Class}.
>
> also around line 107, where it says:
>
> @param labels case labels - {@code String} and {@code Integer} constants
> and {@code Class} instances, in any combination
Should be resolved by:
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13074/commits/bb59254e409821c9b14287c73a35ebe2dd2cbda9
Thanks for the comment!
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/runtime/SwitchBootstraps.java line 263:
>
>> 261: private static <E extends Enum<E>> void validateEnumLabel(Class<?>
>> enumClassTemplate, Object label) {
>> 262: if (label == null) {
>> 263: throw new IllegalArgumentException("null label found");
>
> I think that this one is not hit by any test
Should be resolved by:
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13074/commits/bb59254e409821c9b14287c73a35ebe2dd2cbda9
Thanks for the comment!
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/runtime/SwitchBootstraps.java line 271:
>
>> 269: ", expected the
>> provided enum class: " + enumClassTemplate);
>> 270: }
>> 271: } else if (labelClass == String.class) {
>
> I think that if the condition is changed to `labelClass != String.class` then
> `throw` we can drop an `else` branch
Should be resolved by:
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13074/commits/bb59254e409821c9b14287c73a35ebe2dd2cbda9
Thanks for the comment!
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/runtime/SwitchBootstraps.java line 274:
>
>> 272: //OK
>> 273: } else {
>> 274: throw new IllegalArgumentException("label with illegal type
>> found: " + labelClass +
>
> I think that this code is not being tested by any test
Should be resolved by:
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13074/commits/bb59254e409821c9b14287c73a35ebe2dd2cbda9
Thanks for the comment!
> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/Attr.java line 201:
>
>> 199: /** Are unconditional patterns in instanceof allowed
>> 200: */
>> 201: private boolean allowUnconditionalPatternsInstanceOf;
>
> so I guess this field can be made final now
Should be resolved by:
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13074/commits/bb59254e409821c9b14287c73a35ebe2dd2cbda9
Thanks for the comment!
> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/Flow.java line 909:
>
>> 907:
>> 908: Set<Symbol> permitted =
>> allPermittedSubTypes(clazz, csym -> {
>> 909: Type instantiated =
>> infer.instantiatePatternType(selectorType, csym);
>
> for some cases, when there are no type parameters, this invocation is a
> no-op, do we really need inference at this point?
Should be resolved by:
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13074/commits/bb59254e409821c9b14287c73a35ebe2dd2cbda9
Thanks for the comment!
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13074#discussion_r1172877205
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13074#discussion_r1172877482
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13074#discussion_r1172877294
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13074#discussion_r1172877401
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13074#discussion_r1172878133
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13074#discussion_r1172878329
