On 25/09/2019 15:46, Remi Forax wrote:
...
The other thing is that the return of getMethods() is in any order while i hope
that the return of getRecordComponent() be to in the order of declaration
(the order of the RecordComponent attribute for the VM).
As was discussed in a parallel thread
- Mail original -
> De: "Brian Goetz"
> À: "Vicente Romero" , "John Rose"
>
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Septembre 2019 16:40:31
> Objet: Re: record components as a first class reflection element
>
- Mail original -
> De: "Vicente Romero"
> À: "John Rose"
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 25 Septembre 2019 16:15:22
> Objet: Re: record components as a first class reflection element
> On 9/24/19 8:38 PM, John Rose wrote
I think what John is saying is that once we have a reflective object to
describe the component, there's no need to actually go from there to the
method if we want to operate on it; we can just expose a `get()` method
right on the component.
If we did this, then we'd want to also support
Looku
On 9/24/19 8:38 PM, John Rose wrote:
On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
On 9/24/19 4:07 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
Question - should RecordComponent extend java.lang.reflect.Member (after all,
it has a name and a type). Not 100% sure.
good question, I would say yes, w
On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
>
>
> On 9/24/19 4:07 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>> Question - should RecordComponent extend java.lang.reflect.Member (after
>> all, it has a name and a type). Not 100% sure.
>
> good question, I would say yes, we can say that record compo
On 9/24/19 4:07 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
Question - should RecordComponent extend java.lang.reflect.Member
(after all, it has a name and a type). Not 100% sure.
good question, I would say yes, we can say that record components are
members of the class, but I'm not 100% sure either
On 9/24/19 3:33 PM, Alex Buckley wrote:
At first glance, this is sensible because of the first-class status in
the JLS of record components and their mapping to accessors.
Based on a check of other implementations of AnnotatedElement,
consider `boolean isVarArgs()` (IIRC a varargs component
Question - should RecordComponent extend java.lang.reflect.Member (after
all, it has a name and a type). Not 100% sure.
Maurizio
On 24/09/2019 20:33, Alex Buckley wrote:
At first glance, this is sensible because of the first-class status in
the JLS of record components and their mapping to acc
At first glance, this is sensible because of the first-class status in
the JLS of record components and their mapping to accessors.
Based on a check of other implementations of AnnotatedElement, consider
`boolean isVarArgs()` (IIRC a varargs component will be allowed) and
`String toGenericStri
Hi amber experts,
We are considering our next move in the reflection area for records. It
will be hoisting record components to a first class status in the
reflection engine. Our current proposal is to define a new class named:
java.lang.reflect.RecordComponent which will will be roughly defin
11 matches
Mail list logo