Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inlining generated getter gives @Getter instead of fieldname #562

Closed
lombokissues opened this issue Jul 14, 2015 · 6 comments · Fixed by #3562
Closed

Inlining generated getter gives @Getter instead of fieldname #562

lombokissues opened this issue Jul 14, 2015 · 6 comments · Fixed by #3562
Labels
accepted The issue/enhancement is valid, sensible, and explained in sufficient detail
Milestone

Comments

@lombokissues
Copy link

Migrated from Google Code (issue 527)

@lombokissues
Copy link
Author

👤 vyacheslav.sahno   🕗 Jun 05, 2013 at 05:15 UTC

What steps will reproduce the problem?

  1. Lombok generated getter inline.
  2. Field with lombok generated accessors rename.
  3. other refactorings.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
refactoring result with errors.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
any

Please provide any additional information below.
Tested in eclipse.

@lombokissues
Copy link
Author

👤 askoning   🕗 Jun 13, 2013 at 19:45 UTC

Confirmed 1.

Inlining a generated getter method yields
int foo = @ Getter;
instead of
int foo = bar;

(Why'd you want to do that? Still, it is a bug...)

I'll extract point 2 to a separate issue.

@lombokissues lombokissues added the accepted The issue/enhancement is valid, sensible, and explained in sufficient detail label Jul 14, 2015
@lombokissues
Copy link
Author

👤 askoning   🕗 Jun 13, 2013 at 19:54 UTC

See issue #568 for your second point.

@lombokissues
Copy link
Author

👤 vyacheslav.sahno   🕗 Jun 14, 2013 at 05:36 UTC

I do that as one of steps of refactoring.

@lombokissues
Copy link
Author

End of migration

Rawi01 added a commit to Rawi01/lombok that referenced this issue Dec 4, 2023
@rzwitserloot rzwitserloot added this to the next-version milestone Jan 12, 2024
@rspilker
Copy link
Collaborator

This is part of the latest edge release, all feedback is welcome.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
accepted The issue/enhancement is valid, sensible, and explained in sufficient detail
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants