Defender methods and reabstraction

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

> I don't understand your point, here.
> The spec already says that if X implements A and B and B extends A, then
> only default methods from B should be considered.
>    
To some extent you are right, the spec already considers case in which a 
default overrides another. However it is not crystal clear what should 
happen when you have A<:B, where A provides a default and B does not 
(re-abstracted). In this case, since there's no default in B, the spec 
seems to suggest that the default in A should be considered, which is in 
contrast with standard overriding rules. The solution is to throw 
re-asbtracted method into the picture and to deal with them as if they 
were default methods where the default impl is unspecified. Then the 
spec text follows cleanly.

Maurizio
> Rémi
>
>
>