[core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control (original) (raw)
Paul Sandoz paul.sandoz at oracle.com
Mon May 21 16:39:23 UTC 2018
- Previous message: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control
- Next message: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On May 20, 2018, at 11:32 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
3984 public Class<?>[] getNestMembers() { I still think not removing dups is a mistake as it could be a source of subtle bugs. But i doubt at this point i can persuade you or others to change it :-) Unlikely. :) Again well-formed programs just won't encounter this and it would penalize all well-formed programs.
Although those well-formed programs may need to check for dups themselves because they don’t want to rely in implementation details (and they are not aware of the probability of implementations deviating).
Here’s a thought: did you consider caching the nest members in the ReflectionData class? that may be worth doing regardless of dups.
Paul.
- Previous message: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control
- Next message: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]