Feedback and comments on ARM proposal
xmirog at gmail.com
Sat Mar 21 00:20:49 PDT 2009
+1. A brilliant idea!
Joshua Bloch escribió:
> This is very clever! While it doesn't allow programmers to create their own
> interfaces for use with the construct, it allows future release of the
> platform to broaden the applicability of the construct without changing the
> language. And it does so without abusing annotations. While it's not a
> typical uses of packages, it wouldn't be the first time the language gave
> special standing to a package. For example, members of java.lang are
> automatically imported on demand.
> What do others think?
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Tim Peierls <tim at peierls.net> wrote:
>> How about using a special package -- java.lang.auto, say -- with initially
>> only one or two interfaces -- AutoCloseable and AutoDisposable, say -- and
>> word the ARM proposal so that only subtypes of interfaces with a single,
>> parameterless method that are declared in this special package are allowed
>> in the ARM try-initialization?
>> The idea here is to remove the decision about which clean-up methods to
>> support from the current proposal and make it a library design issue.
More information about the coin-dev