PROPOSAL: Method and Field Literals
jesse at swank.ca
Wed Mar 11 00:26:32 PDT 2009
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Rémi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
> The major pain point of this proposal is, in my opinion, to have a concensus
> on the type of field#fieldame and type#methodName().
The hash symbol is already used in Javadoc for method and fields, so
we shouldn't apply it to something else.
> The proposal uses java.lang.reflect.Field and java.lang.reflect.Method,
> I would prefer java.lang.reflect.Property and java.dyn.MethodHandle.
> (with java.lang.reflect.Property a pair of method handles (getter/setter)).
I'd prefer to limit the scope of this proposal to method and field
literals. This proposal doesn't include properties, but it doesn't
prevent them either. If you'd like to submit a competing properties
proposal, that's fine by me.
More information about the coin-dev