| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This commit fixes two major problems:
1. InnerClasses table missed entries
that would close the chain between
nested and top-level class.
2. In some situations, classes
corresponding to objects would be
not be reported in the InnerClasses
table.
For details it's the best to check SI-4819, SI-4820 and SI-4983.
First problem mentioned above was straightforward to fix so I won't be
going into details.
The second one deserves more attention. From now, classes corresponding
to objects are properly reported as inner classes. Also, members
(classes, objects) of objects are reported as inner classes of classes
corresponding to objects.
There's one caveat though: top level objects get two classes (regular
and mirror). Members of top-level objects are declared as inner classes
of *mirror* class and not regular one. The reason for that is to allow
importing them from Java. For example:
object A { class B }
will be compiled into following classes: A, A$, A$B. If we declared
A$B as inner class of A$ (regular class for objects) then it would be
impossible to import B using "import A.B" or "import A$.B" constructs.
The reason for that is that Java compiler seems to blindly put dollars
instead of looking at InnerClasses attribute.
Since non-top-level objects don't have a mirror class it's impossible to
use the same solution. Thus, in case like this:
object A { object B { class C } }
it's impossible to import C from Java. That's the tradeoff for fixing
other (more serious) problems. It's never been possible to do that in a
clean way so we are not making situation worse.
As a nice consequence of this change, we get better way to refer to
inner members of top-level objects. It's been reflected in one of
test-cases that is updated by this change.
Fixes SI-4789 SI-4819 SI-4820 SI-4983 and possibly some other tickets
related to reflection.
Review by extempore, dragos.
|
