Primitives in Generics

[Jesse Kuhnert]

Sorry, to clarify.

It "feels" like most people who like to tinker in other languages -
even if on the side or smaller portions of projects - tend to not take
anything seriously that doesn't have common language support for
things like "closures" and parallel capabilities.

Given this choice of C you might start to assume Java is just going to
kind of limp along but Oracle isn't seriously attempting do anything
but minimal / easy (from a user acceptance / scary unknown / meeting
deadlines point of view) changes. Given that thought, how much longer
can people continue to look at the jvm as a viable runtime? (well,
realistically right now probably for a while still.. ;) ) There are
more projects coming out for this as well http://llvm.org/ .

I'm probably just frustrated and pouting, but seems kind of weird to
have seen all of this work only to to finish it up like this.
Guessing "someone from above" made the decision for you guys. Or
hoping.

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Jesse Kuhnert <jkuhnert at gmail.com> wrote:
> Really?
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> ... some mad professor cooked up :)  :)  :)
>>>
>>> My take is that you have three choices:
>>>    A) Support function types covering primitives
>>>    B) Support primitives in generics
>>>    C) Do something that doesn't restrict your options to reconsider
>>>       (A) or (B) in Java8 in response to all the complaints about
>>>       sucky parallel performance.
>>
>> Indeed so.  We believe we have chosen (C).  If we have not, please say
>> something!
>>
>>
>