Add API methods to JavaPackage to read package-info.java

[rweisleder]

Resolves #263

[ghost]

Congratulations 🎉. DeepCode analyzed your code in 0.385 seconds and we found no issues. Enjoy a moment of no bugs ☀️.

👉 View analysis in DeepCode’s Dashboard

---

☺️ If you want to provide feedback on our bot, here is how to contact us.

[codecholeric]

Thanks a lot!! 😄 Now there is only one problem, with #171 merged, JavaAnnotation now has a type parameter of the type of the element that is annotated. Since package-info is a "class" for ArchUnit and HasAnnotations now also wants the type of the annotated element, this feels a little inconsistent. In particular because one would expect that JavaPackage.getAnnotations() would return JavaAnnotation<JavaPackage>, but at the moment it could only return JavaAnnotation<JavaClass>.
Have to ponder a little how to implement this best, I guess. In particular whether it should be moved closer to the core where JavaAnnotation<JavaPackage> could be created, or if it is actually okay like this (or JavaAnnotation<?> would also be sufficient as a return type, don't know. But then it's maybe still strange to get the JavaClass<package-info> as the JavaAnnotation.getOwner().
What's your opinion here?

[rweisleder]

As a user of the API, I would expect

JavaAnnotation<JavaPackage> a = javaPackage.getAnnotationOfType(PackageAnnotation.class);
JavaPackage owner = a.getOwner(); // same as javaPackage

And it feels strange to handle package-info as a class because it's not really a class. We should get rid of this:

ArchUnit/archunit/src/main/java/com/tngtech/archunit/core/domain/JavaPackage.java

Line 63 in f1d7da3

this.packageInfo = tryGetClassWithSimpleName("package-info");

[rweisleder]

If we wanna break the user's code we could make the methods of HasAnnotations consistent. 😉
Currently, we have this:

ArchUnit/archunit/src/main/java/com/tngtech/archunit/core/domain/properties/HasAnnotations.java

Lines 33 to 43 in a15d47a

	@PublicAPI(usage = ACCESS)
	<A extends Annotation> A getAnnotationOfType(Class<A> type);
	@PublicAPI(usage = ACCESS)
	JavaAnnotation<? extends SELF> getAnnotationOfType(String typeName);
	@PublicAPI(usage = ACCESS)
	<A extends Annotation> Optional<A> tryGetAnnotationOfType(Class<A> type);
	@PublicAPI(usage = ACCESS)
	Optional<? extends JavaAnnotation<? extends SELF>> tryGetAnnotationOfType(String typeName);

Some methods return JavaAnnotation and other methods with the same name return Annotation. So my example above wouldn't even compile.

[codecholeric]

Hey, thanks again 😃 I've rebased against master and fixed the incompatibilities. The API looks okay for me. Whether package-info.class is a JavaClass or not is a matter of perspective to me. It is compiled to bytecode and it shares some properties, but yes, semantically I would agree.
Still this would be a major refactoring to change this, so I don't know if it's worth it at the moment, since the API looks okay (it should be consistent in either talking about untyped HasAnnotations<?> packageInfo or JavaAnnotation<JavaPackage> where the original package is the owner.
Can you check out the current state if that is okay for you, too?

[rweisleder]

Yes, looks good to me 👍 thanks, @codecholeric

[codecholeric]

Closing and reopening to trigger a new Travis build (the old one seems stuck)