[lworld] Handling of missing ValueTypes attributes

[Tobias Hartmann]

Hi Karen,

On 10.07.2018 20:24, Karen Kinnear wrote:
> So - from a compiler perspective - only classes that share the same ValueTypes attribute information about Point can call ClassA.m1.
> 
> From an execution perspective, we would like to ensure that neither ClassC nor ClassA can get their hands on an instance of Point, so
> we are only passing null here. Tried to close all of these holes - could use review. Note to John - consistency checking for array elements
> relative to ValueTypes attribute is part of closing this hole, i.e. ensuring that a class that has the wrong information about whether a type
> is a value type can not get their hands on an instance of that value type.
> 
> Does this make sense for LW1?

That makes perfect sense, thanks a lot for the clarifications.

Best regards,
Tobias