A disclaimer or two for Optional

Brian Goetz brian.goetz at oracle.com
Wed Oct 23 07:51:15 PDT 2013

(Sigh, why does everything related to Optional have to take 300 messages?)

Here's the reality: if we don't put this disclaimer on, there is 
ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE we will be able to make Optional a value type in 
the future.  Which would be terrible.  If we do, there is SOME chance. 
Not 100%, but more than zero.

On 10/23/2013 10:47 AM, Tim Peierls wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>> wrote:
>     They are more likely to behave, but the special pleading has two
>     motivations, only one of which is addressed above:
>       - discourage users from doing wrong things
>       - provide cover so that when we break code that does wrong things,
>     they were adequately warned
>     ...
>     In a perfect world, the visitor from Flatland would show up and lay
>     the entire future out for us.  We're a few days from Public Review;
>     we're in "better than nothing" territory here.
> Isn't this a little like putting a warning about the dangers of
> addictive drugs only on the methadone because you don't have time to
> post general warnings about the harder drugs? Optional users are already
> in treatment. There's not much cover if you have to say, "You should
> have read the warning we clearly posted in the rehab clinic," to users
> still on the street.
> If it would take more time to *not* add this disclaimer, then never
> mind. Otherwise, there are better uses of the few days remaining.
> --tim

More information about the lambda-libs-spec-experts mailing list