Question ad #AwkwardStrongEncapsulation (Re: Moving the changes in jake to jdk9/dev

Alan Bateman Alan.Bateman at
Wed Dec 14 17:15:25 UTC 2016

On 14/12/2016 16:51, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:

> Thanks to everyone who commented and/or shed some light about the situation for objects that need to
> invoke/access protected members in superclasses. The conclusion is, that nothing will change as
> protected members are still regarded to be public members for subclasses or objects of subclasses.
> In my case that is fine as I have adhered to allowing access to public members (and protected ones
> from subclasses or subclass instances) in the Java bridge.
> Being in the process of tidying up various development threads in the beta version of the bridge
> (including adding javax.script/jsr-223 support) of the past two years, I want to make sure that the
> GA-version scheduled for April will be able to be fully usable with Java 9 that will appear
> thereafter (currently in July). Therefore I have been lurking around jdk9-dev and jigsaw-dev and
> reading the informal description
Oracle publish weekly builds [1] of JDK 9 so it might be best to just 
run your tests to see if hit any issues.



More information about the jigsaw-dev mailing list