From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-26041-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 10617 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2002 19:36:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10601 invoked by uid 71); 10 Dec 2002 19:36:03 -0000
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:36:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20021210193603.10600.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Eric Blake <ebb9@email.byu.edu>
Subject: Re: java/8893: Local classes are named incorrectly
Reply-To: Eric Blake <ebb9@email.byu.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00570.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR java/8893; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Eric Blake <ebb9@email.byu.edu>
To: gbenson@redhat.com
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: java/8893: Local classes are named incorrectly
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:22:44 -0700

 And how is this a bug?  As long as the names don't clash, they are not 
 visible to classes outside the file.  There is no specification as to 
 what names local and anonymous classes must be given, and it is left up 
 to the compiler what naming scheme it will choose.
 
 gbenson@redhat.com wrote:
 >>Number:         8893
 >>Category:       java
 >>Synopsis:       Local classes are named incorrectly
 >>Confidential:   no
 >>Severity:       serious
 >>Priority:       medium
 >>Responsible:    unassigned
 >>State:          open
 >>Class:          sw-bug
 >>Submitter-Id:   net
 >>Arrival-Date:   Tue Dec 10 10:26:08 PST 2002
 >>Closed-Date:
 >>Last-Modified:
 >>Originator:     gbenson@redhat.com
 >>Release:        gcc-3.2 patched for PR 1343
 >>Organization:
 >>Environment:
 > 
 > Red Hat Linux 8.0
 > 
 >>Description:
 > 
 > The fix for PR 1343 is broken: although the names of local classes are prepended by a number, only one counter is used per source file.  For example, the following code:
 > 
 > | public class Test {
 > |     public void func1() {
 > |         class Foo {
 > |         }
 > |         class Bar {
 > |         }
 > |     }
 > |     public void func2() {
 > |         class Foo {
 > |         }
 > |     }
 > | }
 > 
 > compiles to Test.class, Test$1$Foo.class, Test$2$Bar.class and Test$3$Foo.class instead of Test.class, Test$1$Foo.class, Test$1$Bar.class and Test$2$Foo.class.
 > 
 > 
 >>How-To-Repeat:
 > 
 > gcj Test.java # attached
 > 
 >>Fix:
 > 
 > 
 >>Release-Note:
 >>Audit-Trail:
 >>Unformatted:
 > 
 > ----gnatsweb-attachment----
 > Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Test.java"
 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
 > Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Test.java"
 > 
 > cHVibGljIGNsYXNzIFRlc3QgewogICAgcHVibGljIHZvaWQgZnVuYzEoKSB7CgljbGFzcyBGb28g
 > ewoJfQoJY2xhc3MgQmFyIHsKCX0KICAgIH0KICAgIHB1YmxpYyB2b2lkIGZ1bmMyKCkgewoJY2xh
 > c3MgRm9vIHsKCX0KICAgIH0KfQo=
 > 
 
 
 -- 
 This signature intentionally left boring.
 
 Eric Blake             ebb9@email.byu.edu
    BYU student, free software programmer