Hi Eliot.
  || Are you being serious or sarcastic?
I was sarcastics. Please don't kill me. I just too much hate java. I worked
on it to much :))
28 июня 2016 г. 18:05 пользователь "Eliot Miranda" <[email protected]>
написал:

>
>
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 8:17 AM, Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Following this "bad idea" we should agree that smalltalk metaclass system
> is horrible and class should be just a language artifact
>
> Are you being serious or sarcastic?
>
> 28 июня 2016 г. 11:45 пользователь "Jan Vrany" <[email protected]>
> написал:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Nicolas Passerini <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 2016-06-27 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Passerini <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> That is not quite true, annotations are (kind of) objects but you can
>>>> not put behavior in them, just define attributes and optionally default
>>>> values for those attributes.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, you are right. I remember many restrictions was applied to them
>>> which always forced me to hate Java :)
>>>
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>>
>> Well, there's a reason why they're restricted. Note, that the restriction
>> is on language level, not at runtime level. A annotation class
>> with arbitrary code would pass JVM verification (or at least I can't see
>> a rule that would reject such a class).
>>
>> When I implemented annotation support I was initially thinking the same -
>> let's create an instance of CoolAnnotationClass when the code is accepted
>> and then one can add arbitrary code to his CoolAnnotationClass. I quickly
>> realized this is a (very) bad idea. Or, to be precise, it is a bad idea
>> given the
>> environment. So I'd be very careful..
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> P.S.: As for "which always forced me to hate Java": I found myself a very
>> enlightening to think carefully about why somebody else
>> do things differently before I start to hate her/him. Besides, there's
>> whole lot of things that Java guys got right...
>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to