Field and Method Literals

[Alessio Stalla]

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Collin Fagan <collin.fagan at gmail.com> wrote:
> *Adding or removing formal parameters of that method will break the
> compatibility.*
>
> Isn't this almost always the case? I'm having a hard time understanding why
> it's any worse to break an annotation then any other line of code.

A agree. Also, he's talking about Spring, where annotations are used
for the configuration of a graph of objects and are necessarily tied
to the implementation (intended as method signatures in this case).

> But more to the point what is Chris actually asking for? Is it just to be
> able to use static method references with annotations?

I believe he's asking for non-static method references without a
receiver object, usable in annotations.

Alessio