closes #3663.

namers wasn't setting privateWithin on java-defined variables (btw,    )
shouldn't clone carry over privateWithin? better treatment of linked   )
class access boundary (only check for access within linked class if it )
actually exists                                                        )

would have liked more control for the test case: only javac should
compile the java file, then scalac should compile the scala file and
fail

review by odersky

3 files changed, 23 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/test/files/neg/t3663.check b/test/files/neg/t3663.check
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..09ea25ad91
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/files/neg/t3663.check
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+main.scala:11: error: variable foo cannot be accessed in test.Test
+      println(t.foo)
+                ^
+one error found
diff --git a/test/files/neg/t3663/PackageProtected.java b/test/files/neg/t3663/PackageProtected.java
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..f4535a55b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/files/neg/t3663/PackageProtected.java
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+package test;
+
+class PackageProtected {
+    int foo;
+}
diff --git a/test/files/neg/t3663/main.scala b/test/files/neg/t3663/main.scala
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..29619550cc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/files/neg/t3663/main.scala
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+package test
+
+final class Test extends PackageProtected {
+  def bar = foo
+}
+
+package another {
+  object Main {
+    def bug(t: Test) {
+      // Can always be replicated.
+      println(t.foo)
+    }
+  }
+}
\ No newline at end of file