RFR: JDK-8248641: Trees.getScope returns incorrect results for code inside a rule case

Jan Lahoda jan.lahoda at oracle.com
Mon Jul 27 12:46:52 UTC 2020


The existing patch is always filling out the JCCase.body, even for 
statement cases (unlike the parser, which leaves the body empty/null for 
statement cases). While I don't think there's anything directly broken 
by this, it may be better to keep JCCase.body null for statement cases 
to keep consistency with the normal non-copied trees.

Updated patch:

What do you think?


On 07. 07. 20 21:15, Vicente Romero wrote:
> looks good,
> Vicente
> On 7/2/20 9:11 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> Hi,
>> When calling Trees.getScope for a TreePath that is inside a rule case 
>> (i.e. "case ->"), the results are wrong/do not reflect the elements 
>> declared inside the enclosing method.
>> The reason is that, for rule cases, JCCase tree is keeping "body", 
>> which represents what is in the source code. And this body is wrapped 
>> and put into "stats", which are basically the statements for an 
>> ordinary case. This means that javac can typically only work over the 
>> "stats". When TreeCopied copies the JCCase tree, it will duplicate 
>> both "stats" and "body" separately, leading to a duplication in trees. 
>> And then Attr.breakTree points to the requested tree from "body", but 
>> that one is never attributed, and so the appropriate scope is never 
>> captured.
>> The proposed patch here is to only duplicate "stats", and then take 
>> appropriate "body" from "stats", leading to only one copy of the tree.
>> Webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8248641/webrev.00/
>> JBS:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248641
>> How does this look?
>> Thanks,
>>     Jan

More information about the compiler-dev mailing list