From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3180 invoked by alias); 13 May 2005 23:27:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 2981 invoked by uid 48); 13 May 2005 23:27:25 -0000 Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 23:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050513232725.2979.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030119181601.9369.jsturm@one-point.com> References: <20030119181601.9369.jsturm@one-point.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug java/9369] wrong bytecode generated for static inner class with private constructor X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg01852.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-13 23:27 ------- This no longer fails due to a change that went in as part of the fix for PR 8618. In particular, we now emit the 'Inner' constructor as package-private, not private. This is kind of a slacker approach to implementing accessors. For constructors and static methods it probably has the desired effect without doing harm, though I haven't considered it in great detail. For ordinary methods it might be a problem due to overriding. This PR should only be marked as "fixed" if there is another PR for the case of accessors for methods and fields. Even then it isn't entirely clear if this is more hack or more fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9369