generic specialization design discussion

[Doug Lea]

On 4/9/19 1:04 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
> OK, let’s make this problem a little simpler.  The question of terminology in the JVMS is harder, but we have a syntax decision to make at the source code level.  So far its been proposed we replace “value class” with 
> 
>     inline class Foo { }
> 
> In addition to liking the sound of it, I like that it is more “modifer-y” than “value”, meaning that it could conceivably be applied to other entities:
> 
>     inline record R(int a);
> 
>     inline enum Foo { A, B };

I had sworn not to have opinions about syntax, because my reactions are
probably not typical, but "inline" seems to under-stress issues users
should keep in mind. How about "internal"?

internal class Foo(); internal record R();

-Doug