[lworld] RFR: 8367323: [lworld] javac is rejecting valid code after fix for JDK-8359370

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

On Fri, 12 Sep 2025 12:19:56 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadamore at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/Attr.java line 1478:
>> 
>>> 1476:                     return TreeInfo.isExplicitThisReference(types, (ClassType)env.enclClass.type, fa.selected);
>>> 1477:                 }
>>> 1478:                 if (currentClassSym != env.enclClass.sym) {
>> 
>> stylistic (and optional). In a way, if we added that as part of an `else if` it would make it clear that we're in an "implicit" qualifier case (e.g. simple name). Also, maybe adding a one line comment about why we're doing the extra check might be helpful for future reference.
>
> Question: can we ever get here for a static symbol? I think for statics we should never run `analyzeSymbol` right? I'm not sure: `analyzeSymbol` seems called regardless of static-ness. Then it has two checks inside, one for writes and another for reads. The check for reads excludes `static` symbols, but the check for writes doesn't? I think we should maybe write some tests where we assign to a static field from a prologue :-)

E.g. what I'm referring to is this:
https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/pull/1567/files#L1395
What happens if `sym` is static?

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/1567#discussion_r2344085224