JEP 277: Enhanced Deprecation

[Sebastian Sickelmann]

On 10/31/2015 01:32 PM, Patrick Reinhart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 30.10.2015 18:35, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
>> thanks for starting work on this topic. Would love to help to implement
>> some parts of this proposal.
>
> I also would like to do some work in that area.
>
>> For all thinks there seems always a choice between "find all possible
>> cases" and "limit  the false positives", which seems to me to be an
>> important part for the adoption in the community.
> That is also true for me.
>
> In my opinion, we should also look at a implementers side, especially
> on parts that have to be
> implemented  outside the JDK. What about interfaces or abstract
> methods that are marked as
> deperecated? A implementer should not be forced to implement such a
> method in order to have
> the chance to clean up it's code. In that case we would need to
> provide a default method on a
> interface or not allow to mark a abstract method as deprecated for the
> time until this method
> may would go away completely.
I am not sure what you exactly suggest:
Is it(1):  "look through deprecated methoddeclarations in interfaces in
the jdk and decide if a default method can be provided"?
or is it(2): "a implementer of an interface should not be forced by the
compiler to implement deprecated methoddeclarations"?

I think the first one is a good idea and i think you mean it that way.
I count the second one only because I understand it like this, as I
first read your suggestion.
>From my point of view such thinks like this second one should be added
as non-goals to this JEP.

I hope you agree.

-- Sebastian
>
> - Patrick
>