Bug in JLS specification for restriction on where a return statement is allowed.

[Ted Neward]

Can’t it be argued that the “return” doesn’t appear within the instance or
static initializer, but within a construct which happens to be inside an
initializer? (Meaning the text is, at best, ambiguous?)

 

Not trying to nit-pick, just trying to understand how deeply detailed the
specification needs to be, to be honest.

 

Ted Neward

Java, .NET, XML Services

Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing

http://www.tedneward.com

 

 

From: compiler-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net
[mailto:compiler-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Neal Gafter
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 9:24 AM
To: Alexander Buckley
Cc: OpenJDK
Subject: Bug in JLS specification for restriction on where a return
statement is allowed.

 

Alex-

JLS 14.17 says

A compile-time error occurs if a return statement appears within an instance
initializer or a static initializer (§8.7)
<http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/classes.html#39245> .


However, javac allows a return statement within an instance or static
initializer if there is an intervening nested inner class with a method.

static { // static initializer
    class X {
        void foo() {
            return; // yet return allowed within it
        }
    }
}


I believe this is a bug in the specification.

Cheers,
Neal

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20091203/db8cde2e/attachment.html