signatures that are recorded for default methods

Leonid Arbuzov leonid.arbouzov at
Thu Dec 13 23:16:42 UTC 2012

Good point, Joe.
Those extra assertions for default methods can be checked
by regular API tests separately from signature tests.


On 12/13/2012 1:05 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Hello,
> As with concrete methods on abstract classes, I would expect the 
> specifications of the default methods to often contain text akin to 
> "This default implementation does x, y, and z" since if the method is 
> to be called by subtypes, the self-use patterns in the default method 
> need to be known.
> Cheers,
> -Joe
> On 12/13/2012 11:24 AM, Leonid Arbouzov wrote:
>> Hello Lance,
>> My understanding would be that the signature test
>> should check that interface method is marked as default method
>> but do not track the code in its default body
>> (assuming that the body is not a part of a spec - API javadoc).
>> (I've confirmed that with the signature test developer)
>> Thanks,
>> -leonid
>> On 12/6/2012 9:01 AM, Lance Andersen - Oracle wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>> Will the signatures for interfaces that are recorded by the TCKs for 
>>> interfaces record the fact that a method includes a default method? 
>>> or will it just record the method definition?
>>> I am assuming it will, but I know there has been discussion that a 
>>> implementor could choose a different default implementation on one 
>>> of the recent threads that was up for review.
>>> I am still trying to understand what our guidelines are, if any for 
>>> documenting the behavior of the supplied default methods given the 
>>> javadocs are part of the specification for many APIs (and in some 
>>> case the only spec).
>>> Best
>>> Lance
>>> Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
>>> Oracle Java Engineering
>>> 1 Network Drive
>>> Burlington, MA 01803
>>> Lance.Andersen at

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list