8345944: JEP 492: extending local class in a different static context should not be allowed

[mcimadamore]

This is a simple backport of this commit

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue

Issues

• JDK-8345944: JEP 492: extending local class in a different static context should not be allowed (Bug - P3)
• JDK-8345953: JEP 492: instantiating local classes in a different static context should not be allowed (Bug - P3)

Reviewers

• Vicente Romero (@vicente-romero-oracle - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22708/head:pull/22708
$ git checkout pull/22708

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/22708
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22708/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 22708

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 22708

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22708.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back mcimadamore! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into jdk24 will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@mcimadamore This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8345944: JEP 492: extending local class in a different static context should not be allowed
8345953: JEP 492: instantiating local classes in a different static context should not be allowed

Reviewed-by: vromero

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 1 new commit pushed to the jdk24 branch:

• 6fdfa72: 8345773: Class-File API debug printing capability

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the jdk24 branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the jdk24 branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[openjdk]

This backport pull request has now been updated with issues from the original commit.

[openjdk]

@mcimadamore The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• compiler

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (003a6f11)

[vicente-romero-oracle]

lgtm

[mcimadamore]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 67b8251.
Since your change was applied there have been 6 commits pushed to the jdk24 branch:

• 6e8aad1: 8345573: Module dependencies not resolved from run-time image when --limit-module is being used
• 4d6eccd: 8346159: Disable CDS AOTClassLinking tests for JVMCI due to JDK-8345635
• 6bc14d6: 8345888: Broken links in the JDK 24 JavaDoc API documentation, build 27
• 897a8ab: 8346040: Zero interpreter build on Linux Aarch64 is broken
• 3b53ed7: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System property resource.bundle.debug
• 6fdfa72: 8345773: Class-File API debug printing capability

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@mcimadamore Pushed as commit 67b8251.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.