RFR (javac) 8029558: VerifyError: Bad return type when lambda's body is in parentheses - approved
vicente.romero at oracle.com
Sun Dec 8 11:49:26 PST 2013
The patch is OK for me.
On 07/12/13 20:04, Robert Field wrote:
> On 12/06/13 13:46, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Is this for jdk8/tl? If so, then compiler-dev would be a better forum.
> I have sent it to compiler-dev as wqll.
>> The two tests look very similar. Are they materially different?
> They are similar, however one is a lambda call within a lambda
> definition whereas the other is a generic constructor call. And they
> are, respectively, the original submitted test and the minimal test
> case. Especially with these squeaky little corner cases, I am more
> comfortable with both. They are small and non-repetitive, so test
> overhead should be insignificant. After several trials, the test
> duration for one vs both tests is deeply in the noise.
> Can I get a thumbs up from someone?
>> -- Jon
>> On 12/06/2013 01:45 PM, Robert Field wrote:
>>> Please review compiler (javac) fix for:
>>> Fix is to correctly treat the lambda body as a value returning
>>> entity rather than a void entity so that that the correct type
>>> converting casts are generated. This is done by passing the erased
>>> type rather than null as the expected type.
More information about the lambda-dev