Array creation annotation checks #928
Conversation
|
You can use |
|
@thisisalexandercook Please also add test case to show the the check is implemented correctly. |
| TreeUtils.annotationsFromArrayCreation(tree, 0); | ||
| if (AnnotationUtils.containsSame(annotations, NULLABLE)) { | ||
| checker.reportWarning(tree, "new.array.nullable.ignored"); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we use this error message?
new.array.type.invalid=annotations %s may not be applied as component type for array "%s"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, because it is not about the component type.
wmdietl
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you also look at checker/src/main/java/org/checkerframework/checker/nullness/NullnessNoInitAnnotatedTypeFactory.java and see why visitNewArray and visitNewClass are slightly different? Is there a reason one doesn't call super?
In a separate PR, can you also look at why we backed out fb6cb61 12 years ago? Why doesn't the simpler check work?
| List<? extends AnnotationMirror> annotations = | ||
| TreeUtils.annotationsFromArrayCreation(tree, 0); | ||
| if (AnnotationUtils.containsSame(annotations, NULLABLE)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| List<? extends AnnotationMirror> annotations = | |
| TreeUtils.annotationsFromArrayCreation(tree, 0); | |
| if (AnnotationUtils.containsSame(annotations, NULLABLE)) { | |
| if (type.hasAnnotation(NULLABLE)) { |
type is the type of the NewArrayTree, so wouldn't this perform the check you want?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about @PolyNull? Is that allowed? MonotonicNonNull?
Are some of these checks maybe in isValid?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
type is holding what the annotation defaulted to (i.e. @NonNull) and I couldn't find a utility to retrieve the original @Nullable annotation (i.e. getExplicitonAnnotation() does not hold onto it), so I pull the annotations directly from the 0th dim of the tree.
Thanks for bringing up @PolyNull and @MonotonicNonNull, both suggest possible nullness so I think they should be disallowed.
| public class ArrayMainModifierNullableAnnotation { | ||
| void foo() { | ||
| // :: warning: (new.array.nullable.ignored) | ||
| int[] o = new int @Nullable [10]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's usually a good idea to include a test where you expect no error. Here, how about adding something with new int [10] @Nullable [] to make sure that is allowed?
| @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ nulltest.redundant=redundant test against null; "%s" is non-null | |||
| instanceof.nullable=instanceof is only true for a non-null expression | |||
| instanceof.nonnull.redundant=redundant @NonNull annotation on instanceof | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we have a similar warning for object and array creations?
On the other hand, there is the -AwarnRedundantAnnotations option... so should we remove the special case for instanceof? If needed, please file a new issue for this.
| TreeUtils.annotationsFromArrayCreation(tree, 0); | ||
| if (AnnotationUtils.containsSame(annotations, NULLABLE)) { | ||
| checker.reportWarning(tree, "new.array.nullable.ignored"); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, because it is not about the component type.
| @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ nulltest.redundant=redundant test against null; "%s" is non-null | |||
| instanceof.nullable=instanceof is only true for a non-null expression | |||
| instanceof.nonnull.redundant=redundant @NonNull annotation on instanceof | |||
| new.array.type.invalid=annotations %s may not be applied as component type for array "%s" | |||
| new.array.nullable.ignored=nullable annotation on new array main modifier ignored, must be nonnull | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't see any other message, here or in the basetype, refer to the main modifier... which is odd... somewhere we called it primary, but I also don't see that in any of the error messages... Can you look what would be a consistent way to word this?
Other messages in this file also don't use nullable and use non-null.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also can't see any reference to main or primary anywhere else. Where does this wording originate from, what other contexts is it used in?
We could use the JLS wording:
| new.array.nullable.ignored=nullable annotation on new array main modifier ignored, must be nonnull | |
| new.array.nullable.ignored=array type annotation must be nonnull |
fixes #927 , added a warning if the first dimension (element type) of array creation is annotated with nullable. Warning will inform user that this annotation has been ignored. Also added a new error message to support the warning.