That's the missing link. Thanks Archie. Man, I still don't get the decision-making in 1995 to make it not overridable. It is what it is.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025, 10:06 AM Archie Cobbs <archie.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 7:50 PM David Alayachew <davidalayac...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I guess my next question is, there is no bridge method, which is why this >> fails. Why not add a bridge method? What is stopping Java from doing this? >> > In Java class files it's possible to have two methods that differ only in > their return type, but that's not allowed in Java source files (you'll get > a "method already defined" error). > > So the only way bridge methods can be created is if the compiler adds them > itself. When you override a superclass instance method with a narrower > (covariant) return type, this is what happens automatically on your behalf. > > Static methods are also "inherited" by subclasses but there isn't the same > concept of "overriding" - instead there is "hiding". So the compiler adding > bridge methods would be inappropriate - or at the very least, they would > change the semantics of the language incompatibly. > > -Archie > > -- > Archie L. Cobbs >
