Fwd: nest syntax alternative

[Brian Goetz]

Received on the -comments list.

My analysis: while the package { ... } syntax acts as a nice container 
for multiple class units, and might well have been a nicer syntax for 
multiple classes in the same source file than aux classes, it's really 
no different than allowing aux classes to be public; we are still left 
with the same problem of finding the source file corresponding to 
com/foo/X.class, because it will not necessarily be the corresponding 
com/foo/X.java in the source path.




-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	nest syntax alternative
Date: 	Fri, 15 Feb 2019 13:19:00 +0100
From: 	Maarten Van Puymbroeck <maarten.vanpuymbroeck at gmail.com>
To: 	amber-spec-comments at openjdk.java.net



Hello,

Just thinking out loud here.

Remi's proposals about the nest syntax and flattening of nested subtypes
gave me the idea of "package files".
This would allow all classes of a package to be defined in one file instead
of a directory, making them implicitly part of the same nest without the
nested class issue (if it's considered an issue). The concept would be
compiled away completely.

shedding a bike:

package com.test.expressions {
sealed class Expr {}
record Value(int value) extends Expr;
record Add(Expr left, Expr right) extends Expr;
}

Apart from the choice of nest host, this probably has other concerns. But
maybe the idea might spark some other ideas...

Kind regards,
Maarten.
(just a silent follower)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/attachments/20190219/cdd5933a/attachment.html>