[Checkers] Representation of unqualified type

[Michael Ernst]

Mahmood-

In the Checker Framework, is the representation of an unqualified type the
@Unqualified annotation, or the lack of a type qualifier?  I suspect it's
the latter, since I don't see anywhere that @Unqualified is being added to
types in QualiferDefaults or elsewhere.  If so, the Checker Framework
manual needs to be updated.  For instance, it says:

2.6  The effective qualifier on a type

   ...
   3. If there is still no qualifier on a type, then a default qualifier
   may be applied; see Section 2.6.1. This step is implemented by the
   QualifierDefaults class.
   At this point, every type has a qualifier.
   ...

But it may not be true that every type has a qualifier at that point.

At one time, I thought that we were leaning toward using the @Unqualified
annotation, because we thought it would simplify some aspects of the
implementation.  (But maybe it causes problems when multiple checkers are
being used?)
Either is OK so long as it is consistently implemented and documented.

                     Thanks,

                    -Mike