On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 17:45:30 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> ConstantBootstraps.explicitCast behaves like a snippet of code in its >> specification. However, in the rest of the nominal spec, it incorrectly >> assumes a null `value` and a primitive `dstType` results in a >> ClassCastException instead of the zero value of that primitive type. This is >> inconsistent with that snippet and the actual code behavior. >> >> The specification is fixed, the test for `explicitCast` is merged into the >> main `ConstantBootstraps` test, and a new unit test case for `value = null` >> and `dstType = char.class` is added, verifying the outcome is `'u0000'`. > > Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge > or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in > by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains six additional commits since > the last revision: > > - Update throws clause per CSR review > - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into > doc/constboot-cast > - Update wording and rendering again > - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into > doc/constboot-cast > - Update and consolidate tests > - 8364751: ConstantBootstraps.explicitCast violates doc contracts for > null-to-int src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/ConstantBootstraps.java line 414: > 412: * @return the converted value > 413: * @throws ClassCastException when {@code dstType} is {@code void}; > when > 414: * {@code dstType} is reference, and the reference cast > fails; or Suggestion: * {@code dstType} is a reference type, and the reference cast fails; or ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26714#discussion_r2309790161
