Record Component attributes

[Brian Goetz]

> just to be sure, do we agree that a record component can be deprecated, synthetic, have a generic signature, have unknown attributes, have annotation and type annotations ?

Deprecated: not clear what this would mean, since removing a component 
is not a BC or SC change, and therefore removal seems unlikely, but I 
suppose deprecation could be a "stay away" warning sign for that 
component?  On the fence.

Synthetic: I think this is a no.  The philosophy is: a record is a class 
whose representation and API are both derived from the state 
description.  Having a synthetic component would be weird (same reason 
we don't have inner records.)

Generic signature: yes, definitely.

Unknown attributes: I believe that Dan had an opinion here, as reflected 
in the current spec draft?

Declaration and type annotations: yes, definitely.

>
> so the attributes with a special meaning are
>    SIGNATURE, DEPRECATED, SYNTHETIC, RUNTIME_VISIBLE_ANNOTATIONS, RUNTIME_VISIBLE_TYPE_ANNOTATIONS, RUNTIME_INVISIBLE_ANNOTATIONS and RUNTIME_INVISIBLE_TYPE_ANNOTATIONS.
>
> said differently, it's all the attributes allowed on a field but CONSTANTVALUE which makes no sense on a record component.
>
> regards,
> Rémi