This commit was manufactured by cvs2svn to create tag 'buildscript'.

[IRC.git] / Robust / JavaGrammar / tests / Eric.java

diff --git a/Robust/JavaGrammar/tests/Eric.java b/Robust/JavaGrammar/tests/Eric.java
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 04f074b..0000000
--- a/Robust/JavaGrammar/tests/Eric.java
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
-/** Some valid java code from Eric Blake.  Some of these constructions
- *  broke previous versions of the grammars.  These should all compile
- *  with any JLS2 javac, as well as parse correctly (no syntax errors)
- *  using the java12.cup/java14.cup/java15.cup grammars in this package. */
-class Eric {
-    // parenthesized variables on the left-hand-size of assignments
-    // are legal according to JLS 2.  See comments on jikes bug 105
-    //         http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=105&group_id=10
-    // for more details. According to Eric Blake:
-    //       The 2nd edition JLS is weak on this point - the grammar
-    //       in 15.26 prohibits assignments to parenthesized
-    //       variables, but earlier in 15.8.5 it states that a
-    //       parenthesized variable is still a variable (in JLS1, a
-    //       parenthesized variable was a value), and the intent of
-    //       assignment is that a variable appear on the left hand
-    //       side.  Also, the grammar in chapter 18 (if you can call
-    //       it such, because of its numerous typos and ambiguities)
-    //       permits assignment to parenthesized variables.
-    void m(int i) {
-       (i) = 1;
-    }
-    // array access of an initialized array creation is legal; see Sun
-    // bugs 4091602, 4321177:
-    //   http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4091602.html
-    //   http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4321177.html
-    // Eric Blake says:
-    //   Again, the body of the JLS prohibits this, but chapter 18 permits it.
-    int i = new int[]{0}[0];
-    int j = new char[] { 'O', 'K' }.length;
-
-    // plain identifiers can qualify instance creation and explicit
-    // constructors; see Sun bug 4750181:
-    //   http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4750181.html
-    // Eric Blake says:
-    //   Sun admits the grammars between the earlier chapters and
-    //   chapter 18 are incompatible, so they are not sure whether
-    //   things like "identifier.new name()" should be legal or
-    //   not. Chapter 18 treats identifiers as primaries, and javac
-    //   compiles them.
-    class B { };
-    B b;
-    void foo(Eric e) {
-       e.b = e.new B();
-    }
-}