[intrinsics] moving the BSMs to java.util.Formatter

[Vicente Romero]

On 4/10/19 2:57 PM, Alex Buckley wrote:
> Correct; an intrinsification can rely on any Java SE type or member, 
> so the JLS doesn't enumerate the precise types/members used as BSMs by 
> particular intrinsifications.

cool, thanks for confirming
>
> Alex

Vicente

>
> On 4/8/2019 8:15 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> yup I agree, @Alex this should have no impact on the spec side right?
>>
>> Vicente
>>
>> On 4/8/19 11:07 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
>>> Rationale: The BSM for intrinsifying a given library behavior — and
>>> which is bound by the spec of that behavior — is logically part of
>>> that library, and should be co-maintained with that library.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Apr 8, 2019, at 10:53 PM, Vicente Romero
>>>> <vicente.romero at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Today in an offline chat, Brian suggested that the BSM for the
>>>> intrinsification of String::format should be moved to
>>>> java.util.Formatter. The BSM is accessing a lot of private methods in
>>>> j.u.Formatter so it makes more sense to be there plus this will allow
>>>> the BSM plus the library code to co-evolve.
>>>>
>>>> Comments?
>>>> Vicente
>>