[Checkers] framework

[Mahmood Ali]

Greetings,

Thank you for the specification clarification requests.  I will add  
this to my TODO list.

> A couple of items:
> AnnotationUtils.isSame assumes that two annotation are the same if  
> their toString values are the same. The implementation of  
> AnnotationBuilder's annotation returns a different string format.
Thanks.  It's a petty that AnnotationUtils.isSame uses .toString.  We  
should try to use .equals when we can.  I will work on this (It should  
be in within two releases).

> AnnotatedTypeMirror.addAnnotation does not state the behavior if the  
> annotation to be added already exists, but with different element  
> values. The current implementation does remove the existing  
> annotation, it is necessary to manually remove a previous one before  
> adding a new one.
I am indifferent to whether the first add overrides subsequent ones or  
the last one overrides the ones before.  Personally, I view it as a  
map of annotations mapped to their values; where the last .put()  
operation overrides the previous ones.

> For me the best implementation would be to ask the typeFactory to  
> combine the annotations, whereas the default implementation would  
> throw an exception if the values did not match (or possibly a more  
> sophicated implementation that would attempt to combine array values  
> if possible).
Personally, I do not think that is a reasonable functionality in the  
AnnotatedTypeMirror itself.

> AnnotatedTypeMirror removeAnnotation removes annotations based on  
> the annotation's type, ignoring any values. The spec is not clear on  
> this.
I will clarify this point.

> Maybe multiple annotations of the same type on an element is still  
> on the table?
Unfortunately, not.  A change in the language specification is needed  
to allow multiple annotations of the same declared type annotate a  
type.  This is useful in cases like @DefaultQualifier where multiple  
@DefaultQualifier could signify multiple defaults.

Regards,
Mahmood