> De: "Brian Goetz" <brian.go...@oracle.com> > À: "Remi Forax" <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> > Cc: "amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts@openjdk.java.net> > Envoyé: Jeudi 17 Janvier 2019 19:20:05 > Objet: Re: Sealed types -- updated proposal
>> Given that the proposal introduce the notion of sealed types, "sealed" is a >> better keyword. > Note that `sealed` already has a meaning in the context of packages (see > Package.isSealed()), though it is minor. yes, and the introduction of modules made it more or less obsolete. > Is there a different hyphenation of final other than semi-final that maintains > the connection to finality, but doesn’t weird people out? final-hierarchy, final-type, final-bound, bounded-final, final-close, final-abstract, final-transitive, final-tree, final-subtypes, super-final > (One thing I dislike about sealed / non-sealed is that now we have > _contextual_ > keywords with hyphens, which wasn’t the discipline we were aiming for in the > hyphenation proposal.) lets try with other keywords: close-class/open-class, abstract-close/abstract-open, extends-close/extends-open Note that in our context, the keyword sealed/non-sealed has to be followed by either a modifier or class/interface/enum so we can allow it inside the code even if it's not pretty. Rémi
