I agree that, because one can always use the RAW processor (which simply passes back the string template itself), always requiring a processor syntactically seems like a good way to go.
—Guy > On Oct 27, 2022, at 3:19 PM, Jim Laskey <[email protected]> wrote: > > We’ve been having a rethink after recent concerns expressed by several > experts over the current string template design leading beginners down the > path only to stubble over "string templates are not strings”. Our original > view was that users would soon learn to insert the STR, but after > consideration, having the surprise hit them at runtime is not a compelling > selling point. > > Consequently, we are changing things up to follow Tagir’s suggestion of > always requiring a processor; i.e., no naked StringTemplates. As a result, > IDEs can flag the problem when editing or have inspection insert the STR > automatically. For most users, STR would have been used anyway. So, this > change really only affects those requiring the unprocessed string template > (me and one or two other people). In those cases, users can use the RAW > processor. > > Making it easier for IDEs to detect and correct will help mute the grumbling > about naked StringTemplates not being string interpolation. As stated in the > JEP, making Java safe and secure is the goal. This is the way. > > Cheers, > > — Jim >
