Bug ID: JDK-6409829 JSR 199: enforce the use of valid package and class names in get{Java,}FileFor{Input,Output}

JDK-6409829 : JSR 199: enforce the use of valid package and class names in get{Java,}FileFor{Input,Output}

Type: Bug
Component: tools
Sub-Component: javac
Affected Version: 6

Priority: P2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
OS: generic
CPU: generic

Submitted: 2006-04-06
Updated: 2017-05-16
Resolved: 2006-05-13

Versions (Unresolved/Resolved/Fixed)

The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.

JDK 6
6 b85Fixed

Related Reports

Duplicate :	JDK-6415881 - JSR 199: DefaultFileManager.getFileForInput does not validate input
Relates :	JDK-6392177 - JSR269: Support creating package-info.java files
Relates :	JDK-6410174 - JVMS should be clarified regarding internal form of class name
Relates :	JDK-6415780 - JSR 199: javax.tools.JavaFileManager.getClassLoader always fails
Relates :	JDK-6418694 - JSR 199: JavaFileManager.hasLocation(Location)
Relates :	JDK-6420409 - JSR 199: StandardFileManager: cannot set CLASS_PATH location
Relates :	JDK-6420464 - JSR 199: JavaFileObject.isNameCompatible throws unspecified exception (IllegalArgumentException)
Relates :	CODETOOLS-6419713 - some regression tests need /othervm
Relates :	JDK-6417282 - JSR 199: default is not system
Relates :	JDK-6410643 - JSR 199: The method JavaCompilerTool.run fails to handle null arguments
Relates :	JDK-6412656 - JSR 199: pass annotation processor instances to compiler
Relates :	JDK-6411073 - JSR 199: questions not answered by the specification
Relates :	JDK-6411312 - JSR 199: ForwardingFileManager should be generic, by analogy with ForwardingFileObject
Relates :	JDK-6412308 - JSR 199: javax.tools.JavaFileManager.getFileForOutput: spec is the same as for getFileForInput
Relates :	JDK-6413633 - JSR 199: file manager requirements
Relates :	JDK-6411310 - JSR 199: FileObject should support user-friendly names via getName()

Description

According to the spec of getJavaFileForInput and getJavaFileForOutput,
package-info is not a legal class name.  The specification should be
changed to allow these kind of class names.

Comments

EVALUATION There is no suitable existing spec. The JVMS could need a bit clarification and will be addressed elsewhere. If we were to follow the JVMS spec package-info for java.lang would be: java/lang/package-info What we really would like is: java.lang.package-info However, this is not a binary name and not a JVMS section 4.3.1 fully qualified class name. On the other hand, JavaFileManager already exposes API which makes it possible to create a package-info file, namely getFileForOutput. We will change javac's built in file manager (StandardJavaFileManager) to strictly enforce the specification and change the way javac creates package files.

07-04-2006

EVALUATION The specification should be updated to match the JVMS. However, the JVMS is not completely clear on this subject so I'm waiting for a clarification.

06-04-2006