fix(jsii-pacmak): collection-of-union arguments in static functions break compilation #5012
+683
−215
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…reak compilation
In some specific cases, jsii generates some fancy types for unions. For example,
in static functions only, it will generate the following signature:
```java
public static void method(java.util.Map<java.lang.String, ? extends java.lang.Object> arg) {
// ^^^^ check this out!
}
```
I'm not sure what the value is of doing this; I suspect it doesn't
actually provide any additional typing value.
However, I *do* know that when we combine this with union validation,
which generates the following code:
```java
for (final Entry<String, Object> __item_fc3b34: arg.entrySet()) {
// ...
}
```
It leads to a compilation failure, because apparently `? extends Object`
is not assignable to `Object` (I feel like it should be, but who am I to
argue with the Java compiler? I'm sure there are good reasons for it to
be this way).
Rather than remove the `? extends Object` type from the signature, which
I'm not sure what it's for, I'm adjusting the type checker to:
```java
for (final Entry<String, ? extends Object> __item_fc3b34: arg.entrySet()) {
// ...
}
iliapolo
approved these changes
Dec 29, 2025
Contributor
|
Thank you for contributing! ❤️ I will now look into making sure the PR is up-to-date, then proceed to try and merge it! |
Contributor
|
Merging (with squash)... |
Contributor
Merge Queue Status✅ The pull request has been merged at 781b480 This pull request spent 31 minutes 52 seconds in the queue, including 31 minutes 43 seconds running CI. Required conditions to merge
|
Contributor
|
Merging (with squash)... |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In some specific cases, jsii generates some fancy types for unions. For example, in static functions only, it will generate the following signature:
I'm not sure what the value is of doing this; I suspect it doesn't actually provide any additional typing value.
However, I do know that when we combine this with union validation, which generates the following code:
It leads to a compilation failure, because apparently
? extends Objectis not assignable toObject(I feel like it should be, but who am I to argue with the Java compiler? I'm sure there are good reasons for it to be this way).Rather than remove the
? extends Objecttype from the signature, which I'm not sure what it's for, I'm adjusting the type checker to:By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.