> > The reason John gave for allowing a <new> method to return a super type is > for lambda proxies. > > A lambda proxies is a hidden value class, i.e. a value class loaded by > lookup.defineHiddenClass(), > given that a hidden class as no real name, the idea is to use Object or > perhaps the functional interface as return type. > If the functional interface is used, there will be no weird cast in the > bytecode. >
Right. I'm suggesting we remove any restrictions on the return type for `<new>` methods as we've identified cases (like the hidden value class) where restrictions are problematic and haven't clearly identified the benefits from these restrictions. It feels like we're trying to specify a "best practice" while leaving an escape hatch cause we know we need it. Seems like it would be better to not add the restriction in the first place. --Dan
