Trouble annotating explicit receiver with ECJ (works fine with javac)

[stephan-herrmann]

• band aid for type bindings with unexpectedly different ids.

Fixes #4494

[stephan-herrmann]

@srikanth-sankaran in this PR I'm adding a band aid to cope with "similar" types having different ids. I have the feeling that ids should actually be the same, but I didn't have the heart to dive into id assignment at this point.

What do you suggest:

1. merge as is?
2. file another ticket for investigation of the id problem?
3. fix the id problem via the current issue?
4. all of the above? :)

[srikanth-sankaran]

@srikanth-sankaran in this PR I'm adding a band aid to cope with "similar" types having different ids. I have the feeling that ids should actually be the same, but I didn't have the heart to dive into id assignment at this point.

What do you suggest:

1. merge as is?
2. file another ticket for investigation of the id problem?
3. fix the id problem via the current issue?
4. all of the above? :)

I hope this can wait until after M2. I will be able to do justice to the review after #4667 which I expect will be complete by M2.

[stephan-herrmann]

@srikanth-sankaran had you seen #2210? Does it help understanding the issues at hand, or is that only adding to the current confusion?