• Home
  • Line#
  • Scopes#
  • Navigate#
  • Raw
  • Download
1 /*
2  * Copyright 2021 The JSpecify Authors.
3  *
4  * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
5  * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
6  * You may obtain a copy of the License at
7  *
8  *     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
9  *
10  * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
11  * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
12  * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
13  * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
14  * limitations under the License.
15  */
16 import org.jspecify.annotations.NullMarked;
17 import org.jspecify.annotations.Nullable;
18 
19 @NullMarked
20 class TypeVariableMinusNullVsTypeVariable {
21   interface Supplier<T extends @Nullable Object> {}
22 
23   interface NonnullSupplier<T> extends Supplier<T> {
caching()24     NonnullSupplier<T> caching();
25   }
26 
cachingIfPossible(Supplier<T> supplier)27   <T extends @Nullable Object> Supplier<T> cachingIfPossible(Supplier<T> supplier) {
28     if (supplier instanceof NonnullSupplier) {
29       // jspecify_nullness_mismatch
30       NonnullSupplier<T> cast =
31           // jspecify_nullness_mismatch
32           (NonnullSupplier<T>) supplier;
33       /*
34        * TODO(cpovirk): Can/should we change the spec to make the following statement not be a
35        * mismatch?
36        *
37        * I actually think I'm OK with the mismatch: The overall operation would still include a
38        * mismatch (above). And the mismatch above makes sense: it's worth, I tested some similar
39        * plain-Java code that uses Supplier<T> and NumberSupplier<N extends Number>, and its
40        * reference to NumberSupplier<T> fails to compile.
41        *
42        * (A related bug different thing: Our checker currently *doesn't* issue an error merely if we
43        * merely *cast* to NonnullSupplier<T>, only if we actually declare a variable of that type.
44        * It might be interesting to see what upstream CF does. Note that the code this sample is
45        * based on, Guava's Lists.java, has a cast without a local variable. So Guava sees no error
46        * except the one below.)
47        *
48        * (Assuming that we keep the error here, there should be a workaround: Cast to
49        * NonnullSupplier<?>, call caching(), and then unchecked-cast the result to Supplier<T>.)
50        */
51       // jspecify_nullness_mismatch
52       return cast.caching();
53     }
54     return supplier;
55   }
56 }
57