Fwd: Re: RFR: JEP 359-Records: compiler code

Joe Darcy joe.darcy at oracle.com
Wed Nov 6 00:13:02 UTC 2019

Hi Vicente,

On 11/5/2019 2:58 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
> Hi Joe,
> Thanks for the review,
> On 11/4/19 12:33 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Hi Vicente,
>> I've taken a pass over the javax.lang.model portions of the change.
>> Elements.recordComponentFor should have an @implSpec tag.
>> I suggest a double-check of the existing visitors/scanners that used 
>> to extend one of the "FooVisitor9" types and was updated to extend 
>> "FooVisitor14". In prior work, I had to add a new method override for 
>> visitRecordComponent to the printing processor to get the proper 
>> semantics of that class. For example, PubapiVisitor might need an 
>> update.
> I have updated the code for all the comments but the one above. I 
> don't understand what you are exactly asking for,
For the printing processor to have the right semantics after record 
components were modeled with their own top-level element, I had to make 
the following adjustment:


In effect, the unmodified processor with its default methods, etc. did 
not "just" work when the superclass was changed from the old JDK-9 based 
visitors to the JDK-14 based one.

Analogous updates may be needed for other visitors/scanners to contend 
with records and record components.



More information about the compiler-dev mailing list