NetBeans support for proposed small language extensions

[Rémi Forax]

Charles Oliver Nutter a écrit :
> � wrote:
>   
>> John,
>> I am not a big fan of the exotic identifier proposal mostly because
>> i doesn't understand the need and because using '#' creates conflicts
>> with several closure proposal (BGGA and CICE) and my modest
>> property proposal.
>>     
>
> Can you give examples? I haven't looked at BGGA but I didn't remember it 
> using # anywhere. 
# is used to reference method, it's an equivalent to MethodHandles.find*,
techinaclly it's not in the spec but already int the prototype 
implementation
see http://www.javac.info/PrototypeDifferences.html.

You can find more examples here:
http://tronicek.blogspot.com/2008/03/method-references-version-2008-03-17.html

> And an example of your proposal too?
>   

My property proposal is available here:
http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dfhbvdfw_1f7mzf2

# is used to get a reified object corresponding to a property.

>   
>> Correct me if i'm wrong, you need exotic identifiers if you are
>> a language developer that want to implement a part of the
>> langage runtime in Java. But if you are a language developer,
>> you control the compiler of that language so you can lookup
>> for extra meta-data when you want to call a method, a field
>> or a class written in Java.
>> By example, these metadata can be implemented using annotations
>> with no problem.
>>     
>
> I think the problem, however, is that not all language impls will only 
> ever want to do invokedynamic from that language's code; we may also 
> want to do it from Java for simplicity of implementation.
>   
I have no problem with the patch that allow javac to emit invokedynamic
bytecode. I am even a strong supporter of this patch.

I have more doubts with the patch that allow exotic identifiers.
> - Charlie
>   
Rémi