JEP 193: Enhanced Volatiles
forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Mar 5 17:34:32 UTC 2014
On 03/05/2014 05:55 PM, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
> Brian Goetz wrote:
>> I'm all for unintrusive. Though note that the intrusiveness metric on
>> language features I(f) is not uniform across observers :)
> Indeed :-)
>>> Here's my straw man
>>> Add an annotation that can be placed on native methods to synthesize
>>> atomic accessor methods.
>> I suspect you were expecting this response: we don't add language
>> semantics through annotations.
> Technically, we're not adding language semantics. The JVM is the one interpreting the annotations. BTW, as I mentioned in another post in this thread, I specifically asked about this at the JVM Language Summit (in 2012 IIRC) and the answer was (by Alex IIRC) that there is no such rule.
and that's not true,
the meta-annotations @Inherited or @Target change the semantics of the
>> I'm not trying to frustrate you; evolving a language with millions of
>> users is really, really hard. And one of the things that makes it hard
>> is recognizing our intrinsic conflicts of interest between "what good
>> will this do me" and "what harm will it do others."
> I understand, that's why I want to avoid adding language support for this niche/specialist feature.
More information about the core-libs-dev