On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 19:35:59 GMT, Archie Cobbs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> (in your example with static context, my answer is that no, it should _not_ >> compile. A static context can't access instance fields from an enclosing >> class) > >> (in your example with static context, my answer is that no, it should _not_ >> compile. A static context can't access instance fields from an enclosing >> class) > > Yep, sorry that was a dumb example - I should have replaced the static > context with a lambda. > > I'm all for increased flexibility, it's just that it would be nice if that > came with a clean mental model. > > For example, one possible mental model could be "works like effectively > final" - which I think is what you're advocating - but for that we'd have to > break the equivalence between `y` and `A.this.y` (probably worth it). I guess that we should discuss access from a lambda with Dan, and if we decide the rules should be relaxed then do it but I think as part of a future PR. I'm also all in for relaxing restrictions ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/1523#discussion_r2314534459
