1/4. FTR, an escape <\ LT> could clean that up
a bit more, if the goal is to get the
interpolation cruft on a separate line:
~~~
String code = """
public void print(\
""" + type + """
o) {
System.out.println(Objects.toString(o));
}
""";
~~~
2/4. Dan, I'm having trouble seeing your
idea of "prefix" in this example. Is it that
`String code = ` has the same number of
chars as there are spaces before `public`
(start of the first payload line)? This is hard
to read, I'm afraid.
3/4. Dan, isn't it true that programmers can
use this idiom under the existing proposal,
without appealing to your "prefix" rule?
All they do is (a) keep the close-quotes
(in a single ""+x+"" expression) aligned,
and also (b) don't exdent before the close
quotes.
4/4. I guess you are proposing two adjustments, the
"prefix" rule and the "no exdent rule". The "prefix"
rule allows open-quote to set indentation, by counting
arbitrary characters before the open-quote as setting
a target column. The "no exdent rule" disallows payload
chars in columns before the target column, as set by
the close-quote. If I'm reading that right, I'm much
happier with the "no exdent rule" than the "prefix" rule.
— John
P.S. In one example you say something about a missing
newline before a close-quote. Those can always be
introduced explicitly by <\ n>. One reason I like <\ LT>
is that it pairs very well with <\ n>: You can put in <\ LT>
to control a line break, and then if you really want a payload
LT also, you add <\ n> either before or after the <\ LT>.
On May 15, 2019, at 10:17 AM, Dan Smith <daniel.sm...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> ~~~
> String code = """
> public void print(""" +
> type +
> """
> o) {
> System.out.println(Objects.toString(o));
> }
> """;
> ~~~
>
