PROPOSAL: Method and Field Literals

[Michael Nascimento]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Kevin Bourrillion <kevinb at google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 6:11 AM, Stephen Colebourne
> <scolebourne at joda.org> wrote:
>
>> - Constructor literals have to be included. If you don't then
>> developers will find it an unexplained gap. See FCM section 2.2 which
>> uses Type#(argTypes)
>
> Yes, and the worst case scenario is to mimic the Javadoc syntax:
> ArrayList#ArrayList(int).

Nope, since this, unfortunately, is a valid method name :-(

The ugly alternative would be Type#<init>(argTypes).

Regards,
Michael Nascimento Santos
https://genesis.dev.java.net/
https://jsr-310.dev.java.net/