Static method access dilemma and proposal: @NotInherited

Brian Goetz brian.goetz at
Thu Jun 27 12:01:07 PDT 2013

Definitely not.  We don't add language features via 
(implementation-specific) compiler switches!

I don't disagree that there may be times when finer control over default 
inheritance is desirable (though that's a completely separate issue than 
the one being discussed on this thread.)  Its just that adding compiler 
switches is not how we'd consider doing that.

On 6/27/2013 2:35 PM, Daniel Latrémolière wrote:
>> Anything that moves us towards being able to fix this problem
>> over time is good.
> Is a new compiler switch "-nodefaults" possible for helping removal
> (step by step) of unsuitable Java defaults?
> In this case, you can call javac with this switch and obtain
> supplemental errors/warnings for bad behaviour (default constructor,
> default imports, static method call for superclass, etc.).

More information about the lambda-dev mailing list