You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If I follow this the test excecution, at some point in my recursive function,
I pass through the method doAction(), then I arrive to:
call: (parameter of method hasJobAsCaller) ~JavaMethodCall{origin=JavaMethod(some.package.SomeClass.lambda$doJo$0()....), ...}
The JavaMethod in this case is the lambda, which itself is not annotated, so first check is false.
But if I ask for callers of this lambda (I naïvely expect the method itself to popup), I got an empty list, so in my Call Stack, I never got to encounter the method doJob() itself, hence my rule fails here
I don't know if I'm clear on the issue?
I could possibly update my rule to, instead checking the annotation, checking that the caller is in a certain package (as all method annotated by Job are on a specific package), but I would find it more natural and flexible if the rule could directly check the annotation
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, I don't know exactly know how to report it (is it a bug? Something I don't understand? Technical limitation? etc.), So anyway, here's my problem:
My wanted rule
All calls to any invoker method must come, at some point, from a method annoted by a custom annotation (let's call it Job)
My defined rule
This rule seems to work fine, except in one case, except if Lambda are involved.
Problematic code
I have the following code:
If I follow this the test excecution, at some point in my recursive function,
I pass through the method doAction(), then I arrive to:
The JavaMethod in this case is the lambda, which itself is not annotated, so first check is false.
But if I ask for callers of this lambda (I naïvely expect the method itself to popup), I got an empty list, so in my Call Stack, I never got to encounter the method doJob() itself, hence my rule fails here
I don't know if I'm clear on the issue?
I could possibly update my rule to, instead checking the annotation, checking that the caller is in a certain package (as all method annotated by Job are on a specific package), but I would find it more natural and flexible if the rule could directly check the annotation
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: