Tom Hawtin wrote:
> Veloso wrote:
> > Java.sun.com, Sun's main Java site, has an interview with Peter von
> > der Ahé, (
http://java.sun.com/developer/Meet-Eng/vonderahe/) Sun's
> > tech lead for javac, Sun's Java compiler, who
> > claims that if developers know how to use the Compiler API, it will
> > provide a lot of indirect benefits. But are the benefits sufficient to
> > repay the time and effort required? Does anyone have experience with
> > this?
> I think he's claiming benefits for users of certain pieces of software
> that will be able now have a standard way of compiling Java source code,
> that also has the advantage that it doesn't have to start up a new JVM.
> > -- He argues, in regard to generics: "Rather than trying to provide
> > reified types for all instances, why not simply accept that some
> > instances do not have reified type information, because they are
> > compiled with a 1.4.2 compiler, or for other reasons? This turns
> > reification into a best-effort problem: if you use a raw type, then no
> > type information is reified, but if you avoid raw types, you can take
> > advantage of the additional reified type information."
> > Does turning reification into a "best effort problem" make sense to
> > anyone?
> It doesn't introduce any extra incompatibilities. You can use
> reification information if you want to. Seems just about perfect to me.
> You can't use reification for code compiled with pre-JDK7 javac or
> without generics, but then there aren't many schemes where you could.
> > -- His proposal for an alternative to type inference for local
> > variables involves having the compiler provide the static factories.
> I don't see why type inference can't be done for constructed types (have
> to tread quite carefully with terminology here - constructors have
> exactly the same type inference as methods, but generic constructors
> (whether to construct generic types or not) are not well known).
> > -- He discusses the Kitchen Sink Language, (https://ksl.dev.java.net/)
> > which is a place you can modify javac and play around like the
> > ultimate geek. Has anyone been engaged in any experimentation there?
> Nope. And I wouldn't really want to under GPL. Nothing stopped anyone
> playing about with javac beforehand (like Neal Gafter has done).
> Tom Hawtin
|
