Throwing exceptions from records

[Brian Goetz]

>> Yes, perhaps the confusion is over the nature of said "discussion". 
>> The charter of the -dev lists is for collaboration and discussion on 
>> the _development_ of features in OpenJDK, not "any discussion 
>> pertaining to records".
>
>
> Is there a mailing list that is? 

Not one that is hosted at OpenJDK.  But you have the whole rest of the 
internet -- StackOverflow, Reddit, Twitter -- to choose from. And, one 
can generally get away with asking questions here about how things are 
intended to be used, or the rationale behind a decision -- if you can do 
it constructively and respectfully.

> OK, thank you for the explanation. I guess when i read "record" I 
> associate it with a document such as a medical(or similar) record... 
> that is to say, something that is frozen in time and could be 
> reproduced given the same information. Random people elsewhere do 
> mention tuples when in conjunction with records, yes, but I didn't 
> think that was the true purpose but rather a side affect or bonus 
> feature. 

You might find this summary useful:

https://www.infoq.com/articles/java-14-feature-spotlight/

> I take it the name is frozen and there is zero considerations for 
> naming it to something more true to the intended meaning(tuple)?

Yes, the naming discussion has been had, and yes, tuple was considered.  
The consensus was that calling it "tuple" would engender a "but that's 
not what a tuple is" response from those who are used to tuples being 
structural, not nominal, and that this would be a distraction.  So we 
chose a name that was a little less loaded, but was still associated 
with nominal, fixed-sized-and-type sequences (think records in a 
relational database.)  Coincidentally, the C# folks went through the 
same process and independently came up with the name "record".