On Tue, 28 Oct 2025 22:23:59 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:

> ### Current Status
> In core reflection, there are a few holes with the documentation on the type 
> conversions performed on the different setters. They generally follow this 
> process:
> 
> 1. The Object-valued setters checks the destination type. If that type is 
> primitive, unbox the object.
> 2. Perform identity or (primitive/reference, depending on destination type) 
> widening conversions.
> 
> For each step, they can fail with IllegalArgumentException, which has been 
> the long standing behavior.
> 
> Note that this process is more restrictive than the JLS 5.2 assignment 
> context, which allows boxing conversions, while the primitive reflective 
> setters consistently reject them.
> 
> ### Problems
> There are some problems with current specs:
> 1. No mention that boxing is never done for primitive-typed setters
> 2. Array.set missing description for the final identity or widening 
> conversion (reference or primitive) and the associated IAE condition
> 3. Field.set misses the identity or widening in IAE clause (but mentioned in 
> main body)
> 4. Field primitive setters incorrectly claim they are equivalent to 
> `set(instance, wrapper)` which is wrong due to lack of boxing conversion
> 5. Field primitive setters refer to nonsense "unwrapping conversion"
> 
> ### Solutions
> 1. Make sure the unbox -> identity/widen process and the IAE conditoins are 
> present in both Field and Array.set
> 2. Add that boxing is absent for all primitive setters
> 3. Fix the Field primitive setters' "unwrapping conversion" to be "identity 
> or primitive widening conversion" as in Array primitive setters
> 4. Qualify the Field primitive setters assertion with "if this field is of a 
> primitive type" to make it correct

The class description allows for widening but specifies IAE if a narrowing 
conversion is needed. Should we expand this sentence? I'm also wondering about 
identity conversions in description of each method as I don't know if this will 
be understand by reader should links.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28029#issuecomment-3461163146

Reply via email to