Implied readability: calling toString()

[Jochen Theodorou]

I am sorry, I completely mixed things up here. I was talking about 
runtime, but you are not actually even getting there (and then the error 
should be different anyway). Your error is a compile time one and afaik 
not actually new to jigsaw.

So let me make an example:

class A {
   public Inner getInner(){return new Inner()};
   private class Inner(){}
}

new A().getInner().toString()

in this case we are trying to call toString on Inner, which is not 
accessible outside of A, because Inner is not. That it is public in 
Object does not matter for that.

class A {
public Object getInnerAsObject(){return new Inner()};
private class Inner(){}
}

new A().getInnerAsObject().toString()

In this version, the code is supposed to work. At thee "code place of 
calling toString" the compiler does not really know about Inner being 
involved.

bye Jochen

On 30.05.2016 09:39, Sander Mak wrote:
> Thanks Jochen, makes total sense that you'd need readability since the Text type could of course override toString(). I think I led myself astray because the output of javap for this invocation was
>
>        25: invokevirtual #8                  // Method java/lang/Object.toString:()Ljava/lang/String;
>
>
> Sander
>
>> On 27 May 2016, at 14:18, Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag at gmx.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 27.05.2016 13:39, Sander Mak wrote:
>>> I'm running into the following compilation error (build 9-ea+116-2016-04-28-175027.javare.4913.nc):
>>>
>>> $ javac -modulesourcepath src -d out $(find . -name '*.java')
>>> .src/test/client/Client.java:13: error: toString() in Object is defined in an inaccessible class or interface
>>>        repository.findText(id).toString();
>>>
>>> Besides the fact that the error message is somewhat confusing (how would toString() in Object ever be inaccessible?), this example raises a question on implied readability for me.
>>>
>>> In this case, repository.findText() returns a type Text that normally requires implied readability. I deliberately omitted the 'public' from the corresponding requires clause, since I thought that calling toString() (or equals/hashCode) would be possible without having readability on the actual type. In the end it's just an invokevirtual on j.l.Object, right? Am I missing something here? It works fine when adding back the 'public' to the requires clause, obviously.
>>
>> It is an invokevirtual on Object only if the signature of findText(id) returns Object. If the method is declared to return Server then it is an invokevirtual on Server instead and requires the class Server to be accessible
>>
>> bye Jochen
>>
>