Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 09:04:54 -0500
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:04:54 -0700
From: Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: trigger static init
References: <5605o7di8le7conanmf0g70p1ltipeqct4@4ax.com> <m2zkalqs1m.fsf@ipa.eternal-september.org> <17423607.56.1333992983521.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbkr6> <slrnjoavkt.kvi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
In-Reply-To: <slrnjoavkt.kvi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <k7SdnU0xr8MbEhjSnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 30
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.230.201.141
X-Trace: sv3-zOGMFeTk4530VthgRe3f8l0Lw6ui/j5UpCr36JVf9wjauof2p2PKG7PVWaAtWN7CDvBi73wry1O44XU!itW3pjgYuJhWbX+WCP9jvvpuoXkb2llawlwlPcU71oQCFfRJD1NmC7D6Nhy9DpZHKePltU2akFVP!YSDZUOc9m8xqCQaOMXo/g6b+3lovbAa7Dc/m4CeLIA9uQTU=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2646
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:13475

On 4/11/2012 5:52 AM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
> Lew<lewbloch@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Referencing the 'class' literal does not incur class initialization.
>
> from JLS 12.4.1:
> A class [...] T is initialized immediately before first [...]
>    T is a class and an instance of T is created.
>    T is a class and a static method declared by T is invoked.
>    A static field declared by T is assigned.
>    A static field declared by T is used [ ... and not constant ... ]
>    T is a top-level class, and an assert statement (§14.10) lexically
>            nested within T is executed.
>
> Does using a class-literal<T.class>  in "synchronized(T.class) {...}" count
> in for implicitly using the monitor-field of the Class<T>-instance, or is
> it strictly undefined (or defined somewhere else)?
>
> Btw., I don't understand the point about assert. If the assert is
> lexically nested in T and gets executed, then I'd have naively thought,
> that one of the first two points would necessarily have happened,
> anyway, before the assert could be reached. What am I missing here?
>

Suppose S is a static class defined in T. I interpreted that as meaning
that executing an assert in S would trigger initialization of T.

Or suppose S is non-static, but the assert is in its static code.

Patricia