I need your opinion...

[Marek Kozieł]

2009/3/21 John Rose <John.Rose at sun.com>:
> On Mar 21, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Marek Kozieł wrote:
>
>> Allow final variables and final Fields (except blank final), to not
>> having explicit Type.
>
> Yes.  Someone should work exactly this (and no more) into a separate
> proposal, if it hasn't been done already.
>
> -- John
>
> Alternatives: "? foo" would sort of work since the "?" works, as a wildcard,
> for some other type uses, but it is way too strange looking.  A new
> declare-and-assign operator would be nice for a wrist-friendly language, but
> IMO it is too different from existing Java declaration syntaxes.  Beyond
> subjective esthetics, consistency of syntax is important to both mechanical
> and biological parsers.  Meanwhile, "final" variables avoid ambiguities
> about programmer intention for additional assignments to mutable variables,
> so "final" works with extra grace for auto-typed variables.
>
>

Yes '?' would be problem while reading. I was thinking some time ago
about ?? as auto detemined Type:
final Map<??,??> map = new HashMap<String,Data>();
but that would make more problems and combinations.





2009/3/21  <rssh at gradsoft.com.ua>:
>>
[snip]
>>
>> 2.
>> Add forget keyword to allow erase variable from current context (block):
>>    - For method parameters it's now impossible.
>>    - Assigning null to variable is lame and not possible for final
>> variables.
>>    - Blocks not always fit to this purpose.
>>
>
>  Why ?
>

It's good to be able to say that variable should be not used any more
in current context, just like when stream was just closed.
When you will back to code after few months, this will be not problem
for you (while you may forget that this should not be used any more).



>> 3.
>> Are glue classes hard to understand?
>>
>
>  Exists many more-known names for similar functionality  ('traits', as in
> scala, 'flawors' in lisp dialects)
>

I mean logic not name.
And this is nothing similar with traits (lisp I do not know).
Glue classes you can 'bind' to few classes at once.



>> 4.
>> Blocks in classes:
[snip]
>
>  This I can't understand. I. e. block without any semantics - why ?
>
>

I would like to group logic in classes, if I have adding login i want
keep it close without resignation of code formatter.

-- 
Pozdrowionka. / Regards.
Lasu aka Marek Kozieł

http://lasu2string.blogspot.com/