> On Apr 8, 2020, at 11:29 PM, John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > > To summarize: The simplest rule for access checking a > withfield instruction is to say, “pretend the field was > declared private, and perform access checks”. That’s > it; the rest follows from the rules we have already laid > down.
Just had a chance to read this old mail... FWIW, this *is* the specified behavior in the most recent JVMS iteration: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlsmith/lw2/lw2-20190628/specs/inline-classes-jvms.html#jvms-6.5.withfield I agree, private access seems to be the right model. (Plus, maybe at some point, giving the class file the ability to express a 'withfield' access restriction as one of { public, protected, package, private }.)
