tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-741750605858169835.post7562411160205414876..comments2024-01-24T14:53:02.919+00:00Comments on Stephen Colebourne's blog: The future is in the JEPsStephen Colebournehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01454237967846880639noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-741750605858169835.post-51774486029224576282011-11-09T11:35:18.912+00:002011-11-09T11:35:18.912+00:00To clarify, this is what sometimes raises eyebrows...To clarify, this is what sometimes raises eyebrows among my coworkers: List.<Integer>nil()...James Grahnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-741750605858169835.post-58039023913736601412011-11-08T19:22:24.922+00:002011-11-08T19:22:24.922+00:00I agree with your two favorites:
1) The absence of...I agree with your two favorites:<br />1) The absence of Multiset and Multimap from the collections framework is quite painful. I sharply miss Guava and/or sf.net Commons Collections whenever I don't have access to them. (sidebar: still no generics, Apache Commons Collections?)<br /><br />2) Access to parameter names via reflection. Could have used this in a previous project. Although ultimately, the annotations I cooked up in its place may have been a better choice (as I could prettily name parameters in the annotations).<br />--<br />I also would be excited about extending type inference. Coworkers sometimes give me funny looks when they see: List.nil() or the like.<br /><br />I'm still not certain why the constructor name is necessary to append to a "new" if the type being instantiated is concrete.<br /><br />ArrayList list = new();<br /><br />That change would save more typing than the diamond notation (which targets the same use case), it would preserve manifest typing, and it would be backwards compatible. I realize declaring the concrete class isn't always a best practice (in the above, List would likely be the preferred target), but I'm not certain why this wasn't given more consideration.James Grahnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-741750605858169835.post-88772508458777831822011-11-08T09:05:54.140+00:002011-11-08T09:05:54.140+00:00A surprising amount of security stuff! Nice to see...A surprising amount of security stuff! Nice to see PermGen is going to be removed. Still not sure why such low-hanging [frontend sugar] fruit as a decimal type isn't on the table, there must not be a lot of people at Oracle implementing base-10 algorithms.Casper Banghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493174484116672294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-741750605858169835.post-72795635361238880832011-11-08T07:26:52.950+00:002011-11-08T07:26:52.950+00:00I would like to see something like the .NET Reacti...I would like to see something like the .NET Reactive/Interactive Extensions (I made a Java port for myself). Unfortunately, the java.util.Observable name is already taken and the class not compatible with the Rx semantics. Of course, Rx relies heavily on lambda expressions and better type inference.David Karnokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07920580392321059533noreply@blogger.com