On 12/01/2013 2:10 AM, Bharadwaj Yadavalli wrote:
Hi David,
Thanks for taking a closer look at this.
I followed the specification at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlsmith/jsr335-0.6.1/J.html#JJVMS-4.6 to
make these changes.
The illegality check I modified/added for Java 8 is as follows:
if (major_gte_8) {
// Class file version is JAVA_8_VERSION or later Methods of
// interfaces may set any of the flags except ACC_PROTECTED,
// ACC_FINAL, ACC_NATIVE, and ACC_SYNCHRONIZED; they must
// have exactly one of the ACC_PUBLIC or ACC_PRIVATE flags set.
if ((is_public == is_private) || /* Only one of private and public
should be true - XNOR */
(is_native || is_protected || is_final || is_synchronized) ||
// If a specific method of a class or interface has its
// ACC_ABSTRACT flag set, it must not have any of its
// ACC_FINAL, ACC_NATIVE, ACC_PRIVATE, ACC_STATIC,
// ACC_STRICT, or ACC_SYNCHRONIZED flags set. No need to
// check for ACC_FINAL, ACC_NATIVE or ACC_SYNCHRONIZED as
// those flags are illegal irrespective of ACC_ABSTRACT being set or not.
(is_abstract && (is_private || is_static || is_strict))) {
is_illegal = true;
}
On 1/11/2013 12:24 AM, David Holmes wrote:
It is far from clear to me that this change is correct. If a Java 8
interface method is a default method then any of the implementation
related modifiers should be valid:
- strictfp
The above condition does not flag strictfp as illegal and hence is valid.
Sorry I had trouble reading the condition. I see now it is only the
combination of abstract and strictfp that is illegal - as it should be.
- synchronized
From my reading of the spec and conversations with Brian Goetz and Dan
Smith synchronized is now considered invalid.
Something I need to take up with them then, it makes no sense to outlaw
synchronized when you can code a synchronized block in the method anyway.
And can't interfaces now also have static methods?
Yes, they can and the condition flags a method with static modifier only
if it also has abstract modifier.
Again I misread the condition.
Please let me know if I am missing (or misinterpreting) something.
Thanks,
David
Thanks,
Bharadwaj
