On Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:09:52 GMT, Daniel Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hello Volkan, I wasn't aware of this test class and it looks like it has >> been minimally used. The `impl()` method on that test class is a package >> private method which then means that I will have to include a `package` >> statement to this new test itself. Or change the `impl()` method to >> `public`. For now I decided to not fiddle with it. If you would like me to >> pursue it further in this PR, let me know and I can do that. > > The idea is to use the `access` library to inject classes in (internal) > packages when you need access to package protected APIs. That would not work > for anything private - unless the injected class uses > Lookup.privateLookupIn() to access the target class private APIs. The > advantage is that it avoids to redefine the `@modules` - you don't need the > additional `+open` when the accessor class (a public class) is already > injected in the package I have updated the PR to apply this suggestion of using a `HttpClientImplAccess` to peek into the internal field. This does avoid all the `@modules` in the test definition. The test continues to pass with this change. I've triggered a CI run with these changes. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28233#discussion_r2546184156
