I thought the language was being modified to make Dynamic<> exempt from type-checking rules. The way I look at it, grammar is the underpinnings of language. To "read the grammar" is analogous to "compiling the source" -- both are about making sense of tokens. With the introduction of Dynamic<>, I have to amend my understanding of the grammar to no longer perform type-checking rules. Hence, this is a language issue.
Did I misunderstand? Paul On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Rémi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote: > Le 04/10/2009 11:39, Christian Thalinger a écrit : >> >> On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 23:43 -0500, Paul Benedict wrote: >> >>> >>> I've always found it a bit perplexing that java.lang was never chosen >>> for the parent package of the Dynamic API. Why is that? Dynamic types >>> are now "part of the language" as proven by spec itself and exotic >>> identifiers. Will this be reconsidered? >>> >> >> [I'm forwarding this question to mlvm-dev.] >> >> I think John Rose or another member of the EG should have an answer to >> this. >> >> -- Christian >> >> > > java.lang => Java the language (not the platform) > > Exotic identifiers and MethodHandle.invoke calling rules in Java (the > language) > are not part of the JSR292 spec. > JSR 292 => method handle API for any (dynamic?) language > > So why java.dyn API should be a 'part' of java.lang ? > > Rémi >
