[JSR308] Can we agree on our goals?
hani at formicary.net
Fri Feb 2 21:55:48 EST 2007
On Feb 2, 2007, at 9:43 PM, Trevor Harmon wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2007, at 6:21 PM, Hani Suleiman wrote:
>> It's even debatable whether it should be allowed on loops, given
>> that forcing a block onto a loop to annotate it seems somewhat
> I thought putting blocks around loops to annotate them was not
> being forced, it was just one suggestion of how it might be
> implemented. For instance, is it not possible to modify javac to
> allow annotations directly on loops?
> while (i < j)
> That doesn't seem awkward at all.
Sure it does. It's a redundant new syntax that doesn't achieve
anything, and attacks a problem no developers are currently having
(no matter what background they're from or their level of ability,
I'd be surprised if anyone found basic looping constructs tricky).
This example is a great one for why we should *not* support
annotations on loops!
More information about the JSR308