On 2/28/20 1:07 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
So, wouldn't this be confusing? For example, if a record declaration also declared that it implements an interface, you wouldn't know from the 1st glance whether such method is an explicit declaration of accessor or just implementation of the interface method or maybe both? Would someone mind?Q10. Special annotation for explicit declaration of accessors. Tagir [6] proposes a new `@RecordAccessor` annotation to mark explicit accessors, much as `@Override` is used to mark method overrides. A: Rather than introduce a new accessor, we will consider extending the meaning of the `@Override` annotation to include this case.I agree, @Override is fine here even if it's not a real override (using @Override on an asbtract method of an interface is not a real override too so @Override doesn't mean @Override since Java 6 anyway).
Peter
