access modifiers and constructor

[Jack McLaren]

package p1;
public class Parent {
	public int x = new Integer(100);
	protected int parentMethod() { 
		return x;
	}
}

package p2; 
import p1.Parent; 
public class Child extends Parent 
{ 
	public static void main(String [] args) 
	{ 
		new Child().childMethod(); 
	} 
	void childMethod() 
	{ 
		System.out.print("this " + this.parentMethod() ); 
		Parent p = new Parent();       //1                       
		System.out.print(" parent " + p.parentMethod() ); //2 
	} 
}

I have following two questions :

Why code at //1 is valid ? JVM will provide constructor for Parent class, that is not package private ? if not then what is access modifier of that constructor ?

Why code at //2 is invalid although parentMethod() is protected but Child extends Parent class so it should work ?

[Paweł Baczyński]

Jack McLaren wrote:
Why code at //1 is valid ? JVM will provide constructor for Parent class, that is not package private ? if not then what is access modifier of that constructor ?

It is protected. So any class in the same package AND any child of that class (or child of a child and so on...) might access it.

Jack McLaren wrote:
Why code at //2 is invalid although parentMethod() is protected but Child extends Parent class so it should work ?

Because my above statement only applies to inheritance (extending a class) and seeing a class as a whole (and that includes any protected constructors), but not accessing other class' fields or methods.

[Steve Luke]

Pawel Pawlowicz wrote:

Jack McLaren wrote:
Why code at //1 is valid ? JVM will provide constructor for Parent class, that is not package private ? if not then what is access modifier of that constructor ?

It is protected. So any class in the same package AND any child of that class (or child of a child and so on...) might access it.

Not quite. The constructor the JVM makes is a public, no arguments constructor, and is only made if you do not provide one yourself.

[Paweł Baczyński]

Steve Luke wrote:

Pawel Pawlowicz wrote:

Jack McLaren wrote:
Why code at //1 is valid ? JVM will provide constructor for Parent class, that is not package private ? if not then what is access modifier of that constructor ?

It is protected. So any class in the same package AND any child of that class (or child of a child and so on...) might access it.

Not quite. The constructor the JVM makes is a public, no arguments constructor, and is only made if you do not provide one yourself.

You are right. I was reading the code too fast and I "saw" a protected constructor there ;). My bad.