Field and Method Literals

[Rémi Forax]

On 04/17/2011 10:04 PM, Alessio Stalla wrote:
> 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).

I found a nice post from Gavin King that explains why
depending on interceptor implementation is not a good idea:
   http://relation.to/Bloggers/OnCDIInterceptorBindings

I think you can easily apply this principle to constant method handle
in annotations.

>> 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

Rémi