Static imports in 1.5

Question

same static variable and same static method exists in two diffrent classes, while importing these two in my own implementation class follwing different output is coming why? Using j2se version1.5
while using variable imports like
import static package.Class1.variable1;
import static package.Class2.variable1;
//giving compilation errros
while using method imports like
import static package.Class1.method1;
import static package.Class2.method1;
//it is not giving any compilation error.
Can anyone explain?

Answer 1

>
ah ok, when i wrote "Clearly" above i was assuming
that the spec. when it does arrive (or when i can find
it..) will disallow static imports of same signature
methods (or possibly even just same named methods?) -
and clearly any contravention of the spec should be
reported to the userIf the spec says is should do something then it should do that.
>
on the other hand, the more the compiler can do the
better since its a single point used by lots of
people, so any small extra only has to be done once
and is multiplied in the payoff - any individual
trivial error message or warning might be
questionable, but if lots are done then it saves time
I doubt that a lot of people are going to be attempting to apply static imports to the same named item.
not completely the same things, but i like the jikes
feature where it says something like "it look like
you're trying to invoke <SOME API METHOD> - this
doesn't exist but a similar method does with
signature: ... "
I suspect that happens and is going to continue to happen far more frequently than duplicate static imports.
And of course a compiler can add additional things like that. But that is rather different than suggesting that it is required.
when a case is left in the grey area then at the very
least a dozen developers will come across it and
because of the lack of some text saying ERROR will
start to question themselves - i don't see this as
pandering to the developers laziness
And yet none of the compilers warn against the "i = i++" construct.
i've not verified this, and also the lang. spec does
not seem to have been updated for 1.5???
it sounds like the compiler should just complain in
both cases?Yes but given that neither has been used I suspect
that it will complain once they are used. If it
doesn't then that is a bug.hm, a similar piece of code
import java.util.List; import java.awt.List;
complains immediately if you try to compile it - i guess this
isn't that important but i like the
complain-loudly-and-early approach - i think they also
possibly made unused imports or duplicate imports
errors or warnings for 1.5?Could be. However, the spec itself drags significantly behind the additional material. For example note that the 'current' spec doesn't have assert. So tracking down what should really be in the spec can be somewhat complicated.
Note also that I haven't really seen the OP clarify that they expect an error for both cases rather than that they expect that no error at all should show up (because they really want to use both.) And although the first is nice the second is clearly wrong. Hopefully that point is clear.