Feedback on proposal for #ReflectiveAccessToNonExportedTypes

[Alan Bateman]

On 09/07/2016 21:28, Paul Benedict wrote:

> The argument I'm making is not just someone really wants to do this, 
> but that many people won't settle without it. Reflection has always 
> been the tool to dynamically achieve what the Java language can't 
> always express statically. IoC is built on the notion that language 
> boundaries can and should be broken to achieve magic-like behavior 
> like injecting. Look all over the EE spec and see how injection 
> doesn't care what visibility modifier you use... private methods and 
> private fields are just as readable and writable like public 
> counterparts. Nothing wrong here, nothing broken either.
>
Hence the `exports dynamic` proposal. There is a lot of confusion in 
this thread and it might be useful if someone could try out a scenario 
with an injectable constructor or method on a type in an otherwise 
non-exported package. That might help get the discussion back on track 
and get on to discussions or proposals on usability (for example).

-Alan.