RFR: 8028816: Add value-type notice to Optional* classes

Remi Forax forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Dec 4 17:37:16 UTC 2013

On 12/04/2013 03:06 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Overall looks fine.
> If you're listing yourself as the reviewer, jcheck will object if 
> you're also the changeset author. Instead of listing Brian Goetz in 
> Contributed-by, make him the changeset author instead. Using MQ, do 
> "hg qref -u briangoetz".
> The gist of the paragraph being added to each class is,
>     Use of identity-sensitive operations ... on instances of <class>
>     may have unpredictable effects and should be avoided.
> The phrase "unpredictable effects" strikes me oddly. This phrase is 
> also used at the very end of the HTML doc. It makes it sound as if 
> using an identity-sensitive operation might have side effects. That 
> won't be the case, as far as I know. Using such an operation will 
> indeed have "unpredictable results". That phrase is used at the 
> beginning of the last paragraph of the HTML doc, and it makes much 
> more sense to me than "unpredictable effects".
> s'marks

Hi Stuart,
the worst thing you can have is an allocation which is IMO a side effect.


> On 12/3/13 2:21 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
>> Hello all;
>> There's been a discussion on the lambda spec experts list 
>> (http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/lambda-spec-experts/) about 
>> adding a notice to the Optional classes about implications of their 
>> likely future as values. This discussion recently completed so now 
>> there's a doc patch to review:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/JDK-8028816/0/webrev/
>> I have already reviewed this but will hold off pushing it for a few 
>> hours in case someone notices a mistake that I did not.
>> Mike

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list