Skip to content
Permalink

Comparing changes

Choose two branches to see what’s changed or to start a new pull request. If you need to, you can also or learn more about diff comparisons.

Open a pull request

Create a new pull request by comparing changes across two branches. If you need to, you can also . Learn more about diff comparisons here.
base repository: cpovirk/RxJava
Failed to load repositories. Confirm that selected base ref is valid, then try again.
Loading
base: 3.x
Choose a base ref
...
head repository: cpovirk/RxJava
Failed to load repositories. Confirm that selected head ref is valid, then try again.
Loading
compare: wildcard-bounds-declaration
Choose a head ref
  • 1 commit
  • 3 files changed
  • 1 contributor

Commits on May 17, 2022

  1. Declare <? super @nullable Foo> instead of <@nullable ? super Foo>. 

    The latter results in runtime errors when using
`[email protected]:strict`:
Kotlin interprets `? super Foo` to force the callback parameters to be
non-nullable types, apparently effectively ignoring the `@Nullable`
part?

Even if this is technically a Kotlin bug (and I don't know if it is), I
recommend `<? super @nullable Foo>`: That is the syntax that is
preferred [by the Checker
Framework](https://checkerframework.org/manual/#annotations-on-wildcards)
and by [JSpecify](https://jspecify.dev/).

(In fact, I'd likewise recommend changing `class Foo<@nonnull T>` to
`class Foo<T extends @nonnull Object>`. In that case, Kotlin handles
both versions fine. But the latter version is better for Checker
Framework and JSpecify. I've experimented with a version of that, and
I'd be happy to send it as a pull request if you'd like to go that
direction.)
    @cpovirk
    cpovirk committed May 17, 2022
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    44fb24d View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history
Loading