On Mar 8, 2017, at 10:47 AM, Remi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote: > > The exception if the lookup is PRIVATE should be IllegalStateException and > not UnuspportedOperationException. > then, given that the loaded class will have the same protection domain as the > lookup class, i do not fully understand why having a PRIVATE lookup is a > problem.
Since lookups are stateless, so there is never a reason for them to throw ISE; thus UOE is better (loose analogy with immutable lists). We are disallowing PRIVATE in order to reserve it for future use. If you define a class into a private context, the resulting class *should* have private access to the lookup-class, but we currently cannot express this in the JVM (except by hacks). Defining a new class with private access to a lookup-class is the replacement we are planning for the unsafe, undocumented notion of "host class". But first we need a better treatment of what is "private access", which will be provided by a future concept of "nestmate" (at the JVM level) which mirrors the language-level permissions of nestmates. Make sense? — John
