Hi Martin,
On 08/25/2016 02:03 PM, Martin Lehmann wrote:
I am a bit confused here, as you mention toString() . But in case [3]
getName() is not related to toString() – at least not that I can see.
InternalData.getName() overwrites Data.getName() , both returning a
hard-coded String as result value.
So did you mean getName() instead of toString() ? I.e. did you mean:
Ø...because the compiler notices the static type of the
***.getName()*** target is InternalData which declares the
***getName()*** method (and overrides ***Data::getName*** method). So
InternalData should be accessible at runtime for this invocation to
succeed and at compile time for compilation to succeed.
If you did not mean this, I would be lost here... ;-)
Yes, you're right. I did mean to type "getName", but my fingers typed
"toString".
The compiler references the most specific type that declares a
particular virtual method in the emited invokedynamic instructrion. In
this case, it is InternalData which is not exported to the module
performing the invocation. Hence the compile-time error.
The compiler could choose to reference the most generic type that
declares a virtual method with no effect on the final runtime behavior
(in this case, it would be Data), but I think the strategy to reference
the most specific type is meant to facilitate a binary-compatible
change: in your case, removing getName() method from Data and separate
compiling it is a binary compatible change. If the compiler choose the
most generic method's declaring class, it would not be, I think.
Regards, Peter
