[Checkers] <@ReadOnly Object> generic type (fwd)
mpapi at csail.mit.edu
Wed Mar 26 10:29:16 EDT 2008
> These examples suggest a generalization. For methods with no (possibly
> inherited) methods with mutable receiver, make "extends Foo" equivalent to
> "extends @Readonly Foo". Otherwise, "extends Foo" is equivalent to
> "extends @Mutable Foo".
> Does this proposal work, or am I missing something?
I believe that it works. (But it should be "for _classes_ with no
methods with a mutable receiver", right?)
Can we generalize it further -- over all type systems -- so that we can
eventually implement this in the framework rather than special-casing it
for IGJ and Javari? (This goes back to the idea of handing the framework
the annotation type hierarchy and having it sort things out
automatically.) I think "for classes with no methods with a receiver
bearing a subtype qualifier" works, but only for type systems like
Javari and IGJ for which Object is not the base type.
More information about the checkers