[JSR-354] Re: JSR-310 - was Re: Re: Value types
- From: Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@...>
- To: jcurrency_mail@...
- Subject: [JSR-354] Re: JSR-310 - was Re: Re: Value types
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:08:49 +0000
On 28 January 2013 13:54, Werner Keil <werner.keil@...> wrote:
> I meet with people from Oracle quite often or have conversations.
> And the general understanding is, that "ideas and improvements from
> Oracle" were more a complete redesign.
Nope. Refinement of the interfaces, not a redesign, and one that I
made, not Oracle.
> You or the 2 other Spec Leads, Roger ultimately will also have to fix the
> issues, JDK Platform Architects like Brian Goetz, Mark Reinhold and others
> found, especially the "myriad of redundant getXXX() methods" just to name
> one of them.
Nope. The methods on the value types have hardly changed at all.
> We'll base parts of 354 that are targeted at Java SE (9) on the result of
> these improvements, regardless whether you or Roger (SCM logs mostly show
> traces of him though in OpenJDK, all you're visible on is that
> "org.threeten" backport, I don't really see a great point in, but the
> community may prove me wrong on that) actually commit to OpenJDK.
Nope. Since Roger joined the project I have made over 90% of the
commits. I continue to do so.
> You are lucky 310 was started long before JCP.next regulations, as a vast
> majority of EC Members, not me alone would have declared it Dormant or
> requested Spec Lead change.
> Well, Oracle handled that it's way by having Roger step in and do the work
Nope. I'm diong the work. Roger is assisting.