Skip to content

Conversation

renovate[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@renovate renovate bot commented Jun 12, 2025

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Change Age Adoption Passing Confidence
org.eclipse.jdt:org.eclipse.jdt.core (source) 3.41.0 -> 3.42.0 age adoption passing confidence

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

Rebasing: Whenever PR is behind base branch, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.


  • If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.

@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/org.eclipse.jdt-org.eclipse.jdt.core-3.x branch from e49a6da to 76d165a Compare June 12, 2025 11:49
@SirYwell SirYwell self-assigned this Jun 12, 2025
@SirYwell
Copy link
Collaborator

I addressed source code incompatibilities, but there are a few more things to figure out. It looks like we don't visit (and therefore include) default ctors for records anymore. I didn't check how we deal with that for normal classes. Also we print the record component field representations differently, I'm not sure why that becomes a problem now.

Copy link
Contributor Author

renovate bot commented Jun 12, 2025

Edited/Blocked Notification

Renovate will not automatically rebase this PR, because it does not recognize the last commit author and assumes somebody else may have edited the PR.

You can manually request rebase by checking the rebase/retry box above.

⚠️ Warning: custom changes will be lost.

@monperrus
Copy link
Collaborator

thanks @SirYwell for looking into this. important to stay up-to-date with JDT.

@SirYwell
Copy link
Collaborator

It looks like the synthetic canonical constructors aren't available anymore, so we would need to build them ourselves. I'm just not sure where this should happen (we could do it incrementally when visiting the record components, but we need to make sure that this constructor is deleted if there is an explicit one).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants