For further consideration...

[Martin Dobmeier]

Hey everybody,

I'm sorta missing some kind of explanation why some of the other proposals
were not considered (e.g. enhanced string literals, enhanced for loop
iteration control, etc.). Something along the lines of: Do they entail too
big of a language change? Do they address no real pain points in the
language? Were they not specified thoroughly enough? In short: What's Sun's
opinion on those proposals? However, though I've read a lot of the mails
posted to this list, I might have just missed those things. Anyway, my first
impression when reading the short list was that it looks almost exactly like
the language changes that have been floating around on some Sun blogs for
some time now. I admit that it occured to me that it looks a bit "planned"
(no offense though). I'm pretty much happy with almost all of the stuff on
the short list. On the other hand I'd really like to hear some opinions on
why one proposal was chosen over the other. There are maybe to many to go
into too much detail, but just a few thoughts?

Also, what about a List/Map literal proposal? Did I miss that?

Cheers, Martin

2009/3/24 Joe Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com>

> Greetings.
>
> In the first three weeks  of Project Coin over two dozen proposals have
> been sent to the mailing list for evaluation. The proposals have ranged
> the gamut from new kinds of expressions, to new statements forms, to
> improved generics support.  Thanks to everyone who has sent in
> interesting, thoughtful proposals and contributed to informative
> discussions on the list!
>
> While there is a bit less than a week left in the call for proposals
> period, there has been enough discussion on the list to winnow the slate
> of proposals sent in so far to those that merit further consideration
> for possible inclusion in the platform.
>
> First, Bruce Chapman's proposal to extend the scope of imports to
> include package annotations will be implemented under JLS maintenance so
> further action is unnecessary on this matter as part of Project Coin.
> Second, since the JSR 294 expert group is discussing adding a module
> level of accessibility to the language, the decision of whether or not
> to include Adrian Kuhn's proposal of letting "package" explicitly name
> the default accessibility level will be deferred to that body.  Working
> with Alex, I reviewed the remaining proposals.  Sun believes that the
> following proposals are small enough, have favorable estimated reward to
> effort ratios, and advance the stated criteria of making things
> programmers do everyday easier or supporting platform changes in JDK 7:
>
>     * Strings in switch, Joe Darcy
>     * Improved Exception Handling for Java, Neal Gafter
>     * Automatic Resource Management, Josh Bloch
>     * Improved Type Inference for Generic Instance Creation,
>       Jeremy Manson
>     * Elvis and Other Null-Safe Operators,
>       Written by Neal Gafter and submitted by Stephen Colebourne
>     * Simplified Varargs Method Invocation, Bob Lee
>
> As this is just an initial cut and the proposals are not yet in a form
> suitable for direct inclusion in the JLS, work should continue to refine
> these proposed specifications and preferably also to produce prototype
> implementations to allow a more thorough evaluation of the utility and
> scope of the changes.  The email list should focus on improving the
> selected proposals and on getting any remaining new proposals submitted;
> continued discussion of the other proposals is discouraged.
>
> The final list of small language changes will be determined after the
> call for proposals is over so proposals sent in this week are certainly
> still in the running!  The final list will only have around five items
> so it is possible not all the changes above will be on the eventual
> final list.
>
> -Joe
>
>
>