PROPOSAL: Method and Field Literals
kevinb at google.com
Wed Mar 11 08:55:09 PDT 2009
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 6:11 AM, Stephen Colebourne
<scolebourne at joda.org> wrote:
> - Constructor literals have to be included. If you don't then
> developers will find it an unexplained gap. See FCM section 2.2 which
> uses Type#(argTypes)
Yes, and the worst case scenario is to mimic the Javadoc syntax:
> - I would use Field/Method/Constructor, as a key goal is to enable
> integration with existing frameworks.
> - I believe that adding generics to Field and Method (the return type)
> is a key part of this change.
Is it possible to keep that API change and this language change orthogonal?
Kevin Bourrillion @ Google
More information about the coin-dev