RFR 9: 8165641 : Deprecate Object.finalize

Andrew Dinn adinn at redhat.com
Mon Mar 13 12:17:16 UTC 2017

On 13/03/17 12:15, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> On 12/03/17 09:55, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Oh, absolutely, I know about that.  I was just wondering why now, and
>> is this something you just came up with, and are we going to have the
>> compatibility discussion?
> Perhaps now is the chosen moment (and a good choice at that, I say)
> because deprecation in release N is necessary to allow removal or
> modification of semantics in release N+k, k >= 1. So, rather N == 10
> than N == 9 (n.b. in this case, I strongly suspect that inequality on k
> will not actually encompass the equals case).

Oops, obviously I meant:

 So, rather N == 9 than N == 10


Andrew Dinn
Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list