Again, laughable. There are technical reasons for and against op.overloading for BigDecimal/BigInteger, all of which Sun has considered in the past and none of which I am prepared to rehearse here. There are also strategic choices to be made: if we work on BD/BI overloading, we cannot work on something else. Joe Darcy and I have repeatedly explained that language evolution is almost entirely about prioritizing features and NOT about the details of any one feature. And BD/BI overloading is not a high priority for Sun. Maybe we like it technically, maybe we don't, but for sure we like other features more. Evidently, the same is true about other JCP members.
Alex On Aug 14, 4:53 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > Hypothesis: There is a central body in charge of (possibly amongst > other things) picking on a case-by-case basis types for which java > should add operator support. > > Proof that this hypothesis is false: > > Surely, BigInteger and BigDecimal have warranted operator support for > many many years. If a central body adding operator support for > selected classes DID exist, then surely BigInteger and BigDecimal > would have had operator support ages ago. They don't, therefore such a > body does not exist. QED. > > NB: I take it as axiomatic that BigInteger and BigDecimal warrant > support. I can't imagine any argument against the hypothesis: > "BigInteger and BigDecimal warrant operator support", but if there is > such an argument, that would also be a way out of the quandary. > > NB2: I'm perfectly aware that the JCP diligently works through many > issues every java release. I'm also quite aware they don't take mere > mortals like me all that seriously; their plate is much too full for > that, which is one of the reasons I started lombok. Seemed more > productive than whining about it. No matter how understandable your > situation, there are lots of folks annoyed at java's glacial > improvement pace - but I'm sure you're already aware of that. > > On Aug 15, 12:40 am, Alex Buckley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Aug 14, 2:20 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The sheer amount of 'coin isn't making changes fast enough' sentiment > > > here and in the rest of the java community is -staggering-. But, apart > > > from that, if lombok gets some traction and adds a bunch of useful > > > features, but this one much touted feature that everyone wanted (let's > > > say, for argument's sake, closures) ends up blowing feet off left and > > > right, that'd be rather fruitful information for coin and any other > > > snoracle led java language improvement. Features which seemed only so- > > > so in coin and end up seeing a lot of use should similarly be very > > > useful information. > > > You're absolutely right. James Gosling speaks very fondly of > > prototyping language features and getting real feedback. You're the > > first person in the 'Project Coin era' to actually do it, which is > > very commendable. > > > > What, exactly, was my mistake in regards to the relationship between > > > java and the JVM? > > > You said "Java is one of the farthest removed languages from the > > bytecode." (7/26/09) and I disagreed (7/27/09). > > > > I'm getting tired of your insults. In what way is 'central body that > > > picks known cases' laughable? Back up your statements, or stop > > > insulting me. > > > You said there is "no central body that picks known cases with no > > issues and adds them to the language spec." I and others in the Java > > SE Core Technologies team are improving javac and the JLS week in, > > week out.http://bugs.sun.comistestament to the hundreds of issues > > (actual defects and speculative RFEs) that we work through every year. > > And what you can see in public is a fraction of the discussion Sun has > > internally and with business partners. Self-evidently, the known cases > > that individual developers in this group may have with the Java > > language are not considered super-crucial by the JCP SE/EE Executive > > Committee, or else JSRs would have been started to address them. > > > Alex --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
