enhanced enums - back from the dead?

Maurizio Cimadamore maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com
Mon Dec 10 23:48:48 UTC 2018

Thanks for the data - I guess the takeaway is that, as expected, making 
type-checking of raw typing sharper will help migration (e.g. add type 
parameters to  existing code that might use some generic signatures 
already), but it comes at the cost of some source incompatibility.

If we restrict this only to enums, of course this would be a non-issue; 
as you say, enums are non-generic right now, so we have a clean slate 
(assuming we're ok with the asymmetry).

Thanks again.

On 10/12/2018 21:35, Liam Miller-Cushon wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:33 PM Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com 
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>> wrote:
>     Can you clarify: is 1 out of 55Kfiles for the "all raw type refs"
>     option, or the "only for raw enum refs"?  It looks like you are
>     saying the former?
> Yes: 1:55000 was for all raw type refs, with no special-casing of enums.
> (The other variation should be fully source compatible for corpuses 
> that don't contain any generic enums, right?)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/attachments/20181210/4fc37288/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the amber-spec-experts mailing list