Method references in annotations?

[Ben Evans]

Stephen,

On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne at joda.org>wrote:

> On 15 August 2011 23:56, Jason Schroeder <shrode at subnature.com> wrote:
> >
> > Since I now read that there are internal conversations, any
> > implementation experiment
> > I have here is noise, until those email threads appear.
>
> Not really. If you want to help Java and further your idea, then this
> list is all there is. Even if Oracle do eventually manage to publish
> their pointlessly and inappropriately private JSR lists, they may be
> read-only.
>

Please see the text of JSR 348. The intention is to conduct all technical
business of
the EG on a publicly-visible mailing list going forward, and several other
EGs now have
public Observer aliases (hence my question about this group).

There are IP and patent concerns which many corporate members of the EC
(including,
but not limited to Oracle) feel carries too much risk (and places too much
burden on
the spec lead) to allow completely open participation when it comes to
detailed design
and implementation in OpenJDK.

There are efforts underway to fix as many of the problems here as possible.
I fail to
see what purpose banging the drum about problems which were inherited from
Sun,
and which people are actively trying to fix (on the most accelerated
timescale which
the current form of the JCP allows us), serves.


> I think the basic idea of making Method implement a SAM is worthy of
> some further examination. One way to do that is to produce detailed
> discussion, but another is to fork OpenJDK and try coding it.
>

And in fact, many useful and interesting patches / branches have been
created
in other projects (e.g. coroutines, tailcalls, tuples in mlvm-dev). That is
how the
process should work in my view.

Jason - I would say you should most definitely continue with your
experiments if you have
the cycles and inclination - and post about them here if they're relevant to
this
group's aims. Brian - any comments on that?

Thanks,

Ben