Problem with final variables and inner classes (JDK1.1.8)

Question

When using JDK1.1.8, I came up with following:
public class Outer
    protected final int i;
    protected Inner inner = null;
    public Outer(int value)
        i = value;
        inner = new Inner();
        inner.foo();
    protected class Inner
        public void foo()
            System.out.println(i);
}causing this:
Outer.java:6: Blank final variable 'i' may not have been initialized. It must be assigned a value in an initializer, or in every constructor.
public Outer(int value)
^
1 error
With JDK 1.3 this works just fine, as it does with 1.1.8 if
1) I don't use inner class, or
2) I assign the value in initializer, or
3) I leave the keyword final away.
and none of these is actually an option for me, neither using a newer JDK, if only there is another way to solve this.
Reasons why I am trying to do this:
1) I can't use a newer JDK
2) I want to be able to assign the variables value in constructor
3) I want to prevent anyone (including myself ;)) from changing the value in other parts of the class (yes, the code above is just to give you the idea, not the whole code)
4) I must be able to use inner classes
So, does anyone have a suggestion how to solve this problem of mine? Or can someone say that this is a JDK 1.1.8 feature, and that I just have to live with it? In that case, sticking to solution 3 is probably the best alternative here, at least for me (and hope that no-one will change the variables value). Or is it crappy planning..?

Answer 1

You cannot use a final field if you do not
initialize it at the time of declaration. So yes,
your design is invalid.Sorry if I am being a bit too stubborn or something. :) I am just honestly a bit puzzled, since... If I cannot use a final field in an aforementioned situation, why does following work? (JDK 1.3.1 on Linux)
public class Outer {
        protected final String str;
        public Outer(String paramStr) {
                str = paramStr;
                Inner in = new Inner();
                in.foo();
        public void foo() {
                System.out.println("Outer.foo(): " + str);
        public static void main( String args[] ) {
                String param = new String("This is test.");
                Outer outer = new Outer(param);
                outer.foo();
        protected class Inner {
                public void foo() {
                        System.out.println("Inner.foo(): " + str);
} producing the following:
[1:39] % javac Outer.java
[1:39] % java Outer
Inner.foo(): This is test.
Outer.foo(): This is test.
Is this then an "undocumented feature", working even though it shouldn't work?
However, I assume you could
get by with eliminating the final field and simply
passing the value directly to the Inner class's
constructor. if not, you'll have to rethink larger
aspects of your design.I guess this is the way it must be done.
Jussi