[JSR308] array-valued annotations

Joe Darcy Joe.Darcy at Sun.COM
Tue Jan 30 12:23:07 EST 2007

Yes, the JSR's proposal clearly states the intention is to change the 
language, at least in terms of allowing annotations to be used in more 
syntactic locations.  That is distinct from changing the semantics of 
the language.


Eugene Kuleshov wrote:
>  Ted, can we please keep discussion constructive? Of course that example 
> won't compile on 1.5 or 1.6, but that is the point of JSR 308. JSR 308 
> does in fact propose changes in the Java language and introduces new 
> bytecode attributes, but it does not suggest changes in the JVM itself. 
> You can already download compiler that implements proposed changes and 
> play with it on 1.5 or 1.6 VM. See http://pag.csail.mit.edu/jsr308/
>  Also note that Danny Coward is a specification co-lead, so we are ok as 
> long and as long as he is comfortable with proposed changes  even if 
> some of the Sun employees don't like those changes. Also see the scope 
> section which has some important clarifications. 
> http://pag.csail.mit.edu/jsr308/#Scope
>  regards,
>  Eugene
> Ted Neward wrote:
>>> One of the purposes of JSR308 annotations is to make it possible for
>>> plug-in writers to design and enforce richer type systems -- all without
>>> changing the base Java type system.
>> We do have a significant problem in your example, though, David; unless I
>> miss my guess, it won't compile. (At least, not in 1.5; I don't have a 
>> 1.6
>> compiler handy to test it.) That means that no matter how much we want to
>> support that kind of syntax, it's not within the purview of this JSR to
>> permit or mandate.
>> As I understand the scope of the JSR (and reinforced by Joe's comment 
>> of a
>> few days ago), we cannot change the language. Period. No matter how 
>> much we
>> might want to, no matter how useful the suggestion made will be, no 
>> matter
>> how much we all agree it should be there.
>> (Now, if we want to try and expand the scope of the JSR to include 
>> language
>> and/or JVM changes, and we can get buy-off from Sun to do so, then 
>> let's do
>> so, by all means....)
> _______________________________________________
> JSR308 mailing list
> JSR308 at lists.csail.mit.edu
> https://lists.csail.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr308

More information about the JSR308 mailing list