Type variable information is not always maintained for anonymous classes

Sergey merkel05 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 8 20:04:30 UTC 2018

Hi David,

Thanks for pointing that out!

>We need to see how this example work in that case.

I guess anyone involved could have straight away two
test cases: one from the bug itself and another from the
observation above.

In any case. looking forward for that being fixed. I would
also be happy to be able to help with anything if needed.

Thanks and regards,

On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 at 12:03, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi Sergey,
> Just FYI we're in the process of moving away from using anonymous
> classes for lambda's to using an extended Lookup.defineClass API - see:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171335
> this is being done under Project Valhalla, with current work in the
> nestmates branch.
> We need to see how this example work in that case.
> Cheers,
> David
> On 8/12/2018 9:53 am, Sergey wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Recently I've stumbled upon this bug
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213465
> > which is named the same way as in the header of an email. I've done a
> > little bit of
> > investigation and keen to fix it. Though I'm afraid that most likely fix
> > wouldn't be just
> > a one-liner. Thus I want to ask for a little bit of a guidance and make
> > sure, that I do not cross
> > anyone else. With that being said, if ticket isn't in progress and no one
> > minds I want to make
> > an attempt on it.
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Sergei
> >

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list