Re: RFR: 6378384 (reflect) subclass can’t access superclass’s protected fields and methods by reflection

Mandy Chung mandy.chung at
Sat Oct 15 21:31:37 UTC 2016

Hi Peter,

> On Oct 2, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Peter Levart <peter.levart at> wrote:

This change looks good to me.  Thanks for adding the test enumerating exhaustive combinations.  I ran JCK tests and verified that no new failure.

With this change, sun.reflect.misc.ReflectUtil.ensureMemberAccess could be removed when Atomic*FieldUpdater are updated to use Reflection::ensureMemberAccess directly. As of now, we will keep ReflectUtil::ensureMemberAccess. is a great test.  I wonder if could be made less verbose and make it easier to read.  For example, can we add a builder class that takes either the list of allowed or denied MemberFactory  (but not both) to reduce the verbosity.   Builder::allowAll and Builder::denyAll would be useful.  allowAccessMember of a specific modifier can imply both field and method.

The builder will generate a test case that allowed and denied sets are distinct and cover the full set of MemberFactory.


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list