On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 04:43:48 GMT, Joe Darcy <da...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Just to double-check, it is fine to have it in the output of the >> getPermittedSubclasses for the public class as well? > > I'm not certain what question you are asking. If the question is, is it fine > for core reflection to return non-public information about the class, in > general sure. For example, in jshell evaluating > StringBuilder.class.getSuperclass() > will yield > class java.lang.AbstractStringBuilder > which is the non-public superclass of StringBuffer and StringBuilder. > > If the question is, do the compatibility expectations of the platform include > such visible non-public implementation artifacts? The answer is no; it is > fine for those details to evolve and users shouldn't rely on them. > > Is there another aspect of the change that was a concern? Thank you for your clarification. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8082
