[core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

[Paul Sandoz]

> 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.