Skip to content

Use proper underlying type#7791

Open
mernstcheckerframework wants to merge 1 commit into
typetools:masterfrom
mernst:atmflub-visitor
Open

Use proper underlying type#7791
mernstcheckerframework wants to merge 1 commit into
typetools:masterfrom
mernst:atmflub-visitor

Conversation

@mernstcheckerframework

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ffb2d9e0-2170-4382-8eda-47753f46f0b3

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between bc5f09e and 4931f94.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • framework/src/main/java/org/checkerframework/framework/util/AtmLubVisitor.java

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This change fixes a bug in the lubPrimaryAnnotations method of AtmLubVisitor.java. The call to qualHierarchy.leastUpperBoundsShallow(...) previously passed type2.getUnderlyingType() in the argument position corresponding to type1. This has been corrected to pass type1.getUnderlyingType(), altering the annotation least-upper-bound set computed and used to replace the primary annotations on the resulting lub type.

Changes

Area Change
AtmLubVisitor.java Corrected argument passed to leastUpperBoundsShallow to use type1's underlying type instead of type2's

Sequence Diagram(s)

No sequence diagram generated, as this is a single-line argument correction with no new control flow.

Related Issues: None provided.

Related PRs: None provided.

Suggested labels: bug, framework

Suggested reviewers: typetools/checker-framework maintainers

Poem
A rabbit hopped through code so tight,
Found type2 where type1 should write,
One small swap, the bug took flight,
LUBs now computed exactly right,
Hop, hop, hooray — the fix took light! 🐇

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@mernst mernst requested a review from smillst July 5, 2026 04:43
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