ScopedValue.runWhere not returning scope

[Marcin Grzejszczak]

Thank you for the response.

>From my perspective we can consider this thread closed.

Pozdrawiam / Best regards,
Marcin Grzejszczak

https://marcin.grzejszczak.pl
https://toomuchcoding.com


On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 at 14:51, Andrew Haley <aph-open at littlepinkcloud.com>
wrote:

> On 6/21/24 09:11, Marcin Grzejszczak wrote:
>  >  > Who did you think you'd been talking to?
>  >
>  > I'm sorry, but you don't have to be unpleasant.
>
> I thought it was a fair question.
>
>  > I thought that this mailing list should be used for exactly the
>  > reason related to giving feedback on preview features such as scoped
>  > values. I understand that this thread is extremely long but the
>  > problem is complex in my opinion. If you're unwilling to continue
>  > this discussion of get feedback about the features you're working on
>  > then just say so.
>
> It is. What you're hearing here is disagreement. That is the exact
> opposite of unwillingness to have a discussion. It is participation.
>
>  > Afair some people in this thread stated that they are not working on
>  > the JDK. Some, like you, if I'm not mistaken, have not addressed
>  > most of my arguments.
>
> You are mistaken. I believe I've addressed them.
>
>  > I've only heard that for security reasons (scopes could be opened
>  > and closed out of order)
>
> Yes. That is very important.
>
>  > and immutability (I don't understand how the api changes would
>  > modify that.
>
> If you can set a value, then call a method that sets a new binding for
> that value, and that value is different after the method returns, then
> the value has changed. You've lost immutability.
>
>  > It simply allows me to have more control.
>
> The purpose of (shallow) immutability and one-way transmission of data
> from caller to callee is to *restrict* and limit control. Just as the
> purpose of structured programming is to restrict the generality of
> goto statements in order to make programs easier to reason about.
>
>  > What currently is called in the lambda would be manually called by
>  > me. There are no changes here unless I'm mistaken) you are reluctant
>  > to consider my feedback.
>
> Of course I've considered it. Not only have I considered it, I have
> responded here, at length.
>
> --
> Andrew Haley  (he/him)
> Java Platform Lead Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
> https://keybase.io/andrewhaley
> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20240621/812e7e4d/attachment-0001.htm>