Seems we never formally made @unsigned apply to methods, even tho

generating code which assumed this was correct huh

Author: ktoso

Sources/JExtractSwiftLib/JNI/JNISwift2JavaGenerator+JavaTranslation.swift

@@ -2141,7 +2141,7 @@ extension JNISwift2JavaGenerator {
       _fileID: String = #fileID,
       _line: Int = #line,
     ) -> JavaTranslationError {
-      .unsupportedSwiftType(knowvan: type, fileID: _fileID, line: _line)
+      .unsupportedSwiftType(known: type, fileID: _fileID, line: _line)
     }
 
     /// The user has not supplied a mapping from `SwiftType` to

SwiftKitCore/src/main/java/org/swift/swiftkit/core/annotations/Unsigned.java

@@ -32,11 +32,13 @@
  * in a method signature corresponds to a Swift {@code UInt64} type, and therefore
  * negative values reported by the signed {@code long} should instead be interpreted positive values,
  * larger than {@code Long.MAX_VALUE} that are just not representable using a signed {@code long}.
+ * <p/>
+ * If this annotation is used on a method, it refers to the return type using an unsigned integer.
  */
 @Documented
 @Label("Unsigned integer type")
 @Description("Value should be interpreted as unsigned data type")
-@Target({TYPE_USE, PARAMETER, FIELD})
+@Target({TYPE_USE, PARAMETER, FIELD, METHOD})
 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 public @interface Unsigned {
 }