ctVisitTypeReference() doesn't visit RHS instanceof occurrences

[leventov]

The fix I came up with is

--- a/src/main/java/spoon/reflect/visitor/CtScanner.java
+++ b/src/main/java/spoon/reflect/visitor/CtScanner.java
@@ -466,6 +466,9 @@ public abstract class CtScanner implements CtVisitor {
                scan(literal.getAnnotations());
                scan(literal.getType());
                scanReferences(literal.getTypeCasts());
+               T value = literal.getValue();
+               if (value instanceof CtReference)
+                       scan((CtReference) value);
                exit(literal);
        }

But I'm not sure this is the "right" way.

[GerardPaligot]

I don't understand this issue. What is the link between CtTypeReference, CtRHSReceiver and CtLiteral?

[leventov]

Sorry I was not precise.

If I try to scan all references, by calling ctElement.getElements((CtTypeReference<?> ref) -> ...) it doesn't visit references on RHS of isntanceof.

I proposed a possible fix in the issue body. But since from JLS perspective there are no such term as "type literal", probably "right" solution would be create a special class of expression for instanceof, say CtInstanceof

[leventov]

See https://github.com/OpenHFT/Spoon/commit/59968c292df674b6c198c219662897a2c988da19

[GerardPaligot]

The real question here is: why the right hand operand is a CtLiteral and not directly a CtTypeReference? ...

@monperrus Any idea? That sounds good for you to change the right hand operand from CtLiteral to CtTypeReference?

[leventov]

@GerardPaligot I think because instanceof is CtBinaryOperator, which has two CtExpressions, the right one should represent a type, but couldn't be just CtTypeReference (because CtTypeReference is not a CtExpression).

JLS classify isntanceof as binary operation, but it special case the type on instanceof's RHS: it is not a literal, or expression

[GerardPaligot]

@GerardPaligot I think because instanceof is CtBinaryOperator, which has two CtExpressions, the right one should represent a type, but couldn't be just CtTypeReference (because CtTypeReference is not a CtExpression).

This is exactly what I want changed! Deprecate the right hand operand expression and create a new one (typed by CtTypeReference).