inner member classes in final outer class

[Regan Heath]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> Regan Heath wrote:
>> Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>>> Regan Heath wrote:
>>>> Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>>>>> Regan Heath wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, that's where you're confused (by my badly constructed post).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was describing the OP's problem case, the current D behaviour 
>>>>>> (unless I'm mistaken) which is for every instance of the inner 
>>>>>> class to have a context pointer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The example above using static was my suggested solution, of sorts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regan
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, I know you were talking first about current D behavior, but I 
>>>>> was talking about your suggested solution. You do understand why 
>>>>> that solution wouldn't work as you expected?
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>> Are you referring to your comment:
>>>> "Removing the context pointer would imply having different, 
>>>> incompatible versions of the Inner class, and since that alters 
>>>> program semantics the compiler cannot do that"
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Regan
>>>
>>> No, I mean making the context pointer static.
>>
>> Please explain why it wont work (as I expect - assuming you're not 
>> confused about what I expect too <g>)?
>>
>> Regan
> 
> Damn it, I already did! :P
> You said you wanted to "have only X outer references, instead of X*Y 
> outer references", right? And like I said, if you (or the compiler) made 
> the context pointer static (as in 'static' storage class in a var 
> declaration), you would have only 1 outer reference (not X), since 
> static would make that "variable" unique.

Doh!  Somehow I totally missed that, you're quite correct. :)

Regan