Re: redundant field initializers

[Chris Gray]

On Monday 20 September 2004 22:42, Per Bothner wrote:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Why would a compiler emit extra initialization code for default values
> > for fields? Not that I object to removing them, but it looks like the
> > compiler emits unnecessary code in this case.
>
> One can construct torture cases where the semantics are different, for
> both static and instance fields, if some code change the field value
> before the initialization is assigned.

For this reason, removing the initialiser is not necessarily harmless; the 
code _might_ not work without it. Of course, such code should not be allowed 
to exist ...

-- 
Chris Gray                      /k/ Embedded Java Solutions
Embedded & Mobile Java, OSGi        http://www.kiffer.be/k/
address@hidden                         +32 3 216 0369