BinaryCompatibleDefaultMethods

From APIDesign

Revision as of 08:09, 29 September 2020

DefaultMethods are useful when one desperately needs to add a method into an existing interface (check why you should strive to avoid that). However sometimes there is a need to do so, then it is handy that DefaultMethods are available since JDK8.

However, use with care. It has recently been demonstrated that adding DefaultMethods can compromise BinaryCompatibility. Recently Emilian Bold asked me to participate in a tweeting about binary incompatibility caused by adding new CharSequence.isEmpty default method in JDK15. An interesting case. To summarize: Following code compiles and runs on JDK8 to JDK14:

public interface ArrayLike {
    int length();
 
    default boolean isEmpty() {
        return length() == 0;
    }
}
 
final class CharArrayLike implements CharSequence, ArrayLike {
    private final char[] chars;
 
    CharArrayLike(char... chars) {
        this.chars = chars;
    }
 
    @Override
    public int length() {
        return chars.length;
    }
 
    @Override
    public char charAt(int index) {
        return chars[index];
    }
 
    @Override
    public CharSequence subSequence(int start, int end) {
        return new String(chars, start, end);
    }
 
    public static void main(String... args) {
        boolean empty = new CharArrayLike('E', 'r', 'r', 'o', 'r', '!').isEmpty();
        System.err.println("not empty: " + empty);
    }    
}

However trying to run the code on JDK15, gives a linkage error.

$ /jdk-14/bin/javac ArrayLike.java
$ /jdk-14/bin/java CharArrayLike 
not empty: false
$ /jdk-15/bin/java CharArrayLike 
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IncompatibleClassChangeError: Conflicting default methods: java/lang/CharSequence.isEmpty ArrayLike.isEmpty
        at CharArrayLike.isEmpty(ArrayLike.java)
        at CharArrayLike.main(ArrayLike.java:32)

Why? Since JDK15 there is the new CharSequence.isEmpty() default method. As such, when the JVM wants to processes the CharArrayLike class it doesn't know whether to dispatch to the ArrayLike.isEmpty() or to the newly added method. That means a code that used to run on older JDKs, don't even link and result into a runtime error on JDK15. That's not good. A code that used to work on previous version of Java no longer works on new JDK. Unfortunate mistake. The fix is simple - just override the method and dispatch manually:

final class CharArrayLike implements CharSequence, ArrayLike {
    @Override
    public boolean isEmpty() {
        return ArrayLike.super.isEmpty();
    }
}

but such fix has to be made across all affected libraries. All applications using such libraries need to update to the latest libraries versions and only then they can run on JDK15. That no longer sounds as simple, right? Clearly DefaultMethods aren't a heaven sent solution, they have some cost! If you are writing an API and want to avoid your customers paying that cost, then separate API from SPI and don't mix the two concepts (especially in types that are frequently implemented by users of your API).

Why now? Why not then?

It would be possible to end the story here, but let's go on. The CharSequence.isEmpty() case is not the first time a CharSequence interface was enhanced with additional DefaultMethods. In JDK8 the interface got two new methods:

public default IntStream chars();
public default IntStream codePoints();

No problem happened back then. How comes? No clash happened. Was it just a pure luck?

No! It wasn't a luck. The JDK8 addition of chars() and codePoints() was BinaryCompatible! Because adding new methods into an existing type cannot clash, if one of the arguments, or a return type is a newly introduced type. IntStream was also added in JDK8 - as such the methods couldn't clash with any code compiled on JDK7. A method invocation reference in a bytecode encodes not only name of the method, but also types of all parameters and return type. As such it was impossible on JDK7 to compile method with exactly the same signature.

Moral of the story? When trying to add DefaultMethods into existing interfaces in a 100% compatible way, also add a new type. Then it has to be BackwardCompatible! Adding simple signatures like boolean isEmpty() may clash. Adding complex signature like IntStream codePoints() cannot!

Apply the Knowledge

Now, when we know how to enhance interfaces with DefaultMethods compatibly, let's continue the mental experiment and apply the know-how to the CharSequence.isEmpty() case. Let's be super modern and let's use record feature:

interface CharSequence {
  /** @since 15 */
  record Status(boolean empty);
 
  /** @since 15 */
  default Status status() {
     return Status(length() == 0);
  }
}

That'd be completely compatible evolution. People would have to write seq.status().empty() instead of simple seq.isEmpty(). But does that matter? Not from a performance perspective - any good JIT compiler eliminates any overhead. Then it is just about the will to be 100% compatible or the lack of it.

Moreover this kind of evolution "mounts" an open space of ClientAPI on the CharSequence interface. E.g. in future versions it will be easy to expand the Status class with new attributes. For example in JDK23 one could add:

interface CharSequence {
  record Status(boolean empty, boolean large, boolean asciiOnly);
 
  default Status status() {
     return Status(length() == 0, length() > 255, codePoints().allMatch((ch) -> ch <= 127);
  }
}

That'd be a BinaryCompatible change (if one follows RecordEvolution rules properly). And so on, so on: New attributes could be added to the Status over time. Adding DefaultMethods to interfaces in a 100% BinaryCompatible way is possible at the end!