Am 18.01.2018 um 14:59 schrieb jeffrey kutcher:
In this example, if I can access and execute the method
vbox.getChildren().add() with no warnings or errors, which is accessing a
non-public class
In Java the static type is the important one. Of course you can do
VBox vbox = .... // returns implementation from nonexported package
vbox.getChildren().add()
This will work as long as VBox is accessible. the getChildren call is
not done using the implementation type, but VBox. And for this it does
not matter that vbox has a "forbidden" type at runtime at all.
Conclusively you have to do more at runtime if all you have is the
runtime type of vbox. You have to check if this type is accessible to
you and if not go to a super class. You would then maybe also end up in
Vbox and invoke the method you get for VBox, not for the implementation
of VBox. You still do a virtual method call, so the implementation
method is still called
then I should also able to access that very same class and execute the same method using reflection with no warnings or errors and expect the same results. If not, the inconsistency may be a bug, feature or broken.
design choice I would claim.
Maybe that's the way it's suppose to work. Inconsistency however tells me
something isn't quite right and if ignored will cause more issues later on.
That is because Reflection has been declared as broken in that it has a
tradition of allowing too much. Now this has been restricted, leading to
problems. But in this case you just have to use the type the Java
compiler would, which is VBOX.
In this particular case, a lock down will completely stop currently working
code.
You are not alone here.
bye Jochen
