Follow up on Bug 377850

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Follow up on Bug 377850

Gunnar Wagenknecht
Hi Stephan,

I thought it might be better to continue the discussion on the mailing list. Thanks a lot for your help!

I started debugging the issue I'm experiencing described here:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=377850#c34

So far I found out that the problem is being reported because
org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.PackageBinding.hasType0Any(char[])

returns true for the problematic name.

What I noticed during debugging is that:
- the PackageBinding is an instance of PlainPackageBinding
- the found type is an instance of ProblemReferenceBinding
- the problemReason is type 1 (ProblemReasons.NotFound)

Can this be a valid case for reporting this error? If the problem reason is NotFound, shouldn't this be handled as "no collision"?

-Gunnar

--
Gunnar Wagenknecht
[hidden email], http://guw.io/


_______________________________________________
jdt-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Follow up on Bug 377850

Gunnar Wagenknecht
To close the loop on this one, I believe the errors we saw happen because of too early compilation, i.e. the classpath isn't complete yet because code isn't fully complied.

I noticed that the batch compiler is disabling class file generation when "-proc:only" is specified. I wonder if this option wasn't available before. Anyway, disabling class file generation made the issues go away.

-Gunnar

--
Gunnar Wagenknecht
[hidden email], http://guw.io/


> On Mar 5, 2020, at 21:00, Gunnar Wagenknecht <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Stephan,
>
> I thought it might be better to continue the discussion on the mailing list. Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> I started debugging the issue I'm experiencing described here:
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=377850#c34
>
> So far I found out that the problem is being reported because
> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.PackageBinding.hasType0Any(char[])
>
> returns true for the problematic name.
>
> What I noticed during debugging is that:
> - the PackageBinding is an instance of PlainPackageBinding
> - the found type is an instance of ProblemReferenceBinding
> - the problemReason is type 1 (ProblemReasons.NotFound)
>
> Can this be a valid case for reporting this error? If the problem reason is NotFound, shouldn't this be handled as "no collision"?
>
> -Gunnar
>
> --
> Gunnar Wagenknecht
> [hidden email], http://guw.io/
>
>

_______________________________________________
jdt-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Follow up on Bug 377850

Stephan Herrmann-2
In reply to this post by Gunnar Wagenknecht
On 05.03.20 21:00, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote:

> Hi Stephan,
>
> I thought it might be better to continue the discussion on the mailing list. Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> I started debugging the issue I'm experiencing described here:
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=377850#c34
>
> So far I found out that the problem is being reported because
> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.PackageBinding.hasType0Any(char[])
>
> returns true for the problematic name.
>
> What I noticed during debugging is that:
> - the PackageBinding is an instance of PlainPackageBinding
> - the found type is an instance of ProblemReferenceBinding
> - the problemReason is type 1 (ProblemReasons.NotFound)
>
> Can this be a valid case for reporting this error? If the problem reason is NotFound, shouldn't this be handled as "no collision"?
>
> -Gunnar
>

Sure, a not found type is not a very good reason to report a conflict.

Please file a new bug for this.

As you already started debugging this, it would be great if you could also add a
word on why that ProblemReferenceBinding exists in the first place (conditional
breakpoint on constructors of ProblemReferenceBinding)?

thanks,
Stephan
_______________________________________________
jdt-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev