java/8899: gcj confused over local classes

[Tom Tromey]

The following reply was made to PR java/8899; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: gbenson@redhat.com
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: java/8899: gcj confused over local classes
Date: 13 Dec 2002 10:20:25 -0700

 >>>>> "Gary" == Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com> writes:
 
 Gary> Number:         8899
 Gary> Synopsis:       gcj confused over local classes
 
 Gary> | public class Test {
 Gary> |     public void func1() {
 Gary> | 	class Foo {
 Gary> | 	    Foo(int i) {
 Gary> | 	    }
 Gary> | 	}
 Gary> | 	Foo f = new Foo(1);
 Gary> |     }
 Gary> |     public void func2() {
 Gary> | 	class Foo {
 Gary> | 	    Foo(boolean b) {
 Gary> | 	    }
 Gary> | 	}
 Gary> |     }
 Gary> | }
 
 I looked at this last night.
 
 It turns out that gcj has no notion of scope for member classes.  It
 puts them all in a single list attached to the class.  So the problem
 is that basic required functionality is missing from gcj.
 
 Tom