As per this email:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2017-February/011365.html
the idea was to add a new annotation `java.lang.annotation.Generated`
to replace the old problematic one.
Is it my imagination, or did this get forgotten?:
http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/api/
On 20/09/2017 13:43, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
As per this email:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2017-February/011365.html
the idea was to add a new annotation `java.lang.annotation.Generated`
to replace the old problematic one.
Is it my imagination, or did this get forgotte
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 20/09/2017 13:43, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>
>> As per this email:
>>
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2017-February/011365.html
>> the idea was to add a new annotation `java.lang.annotation.Generated`
>> to replace th
Ouch. Thats an unpleasant result. It should have gone in `java.lang.annotation`.
Stephen
On 20 September 2017 at 13:49, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 20/09/2017 13:43, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>
>> As per this email:
>>
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2017-February/011365.html
>
And possibly have retention "class"
On Sep 20, 2017 14:59, "Stephen Colebourne" wrote:
> Ouch. Thats an unpleasant result. It should have gone in
> `java.lang.annotation`.
> Stephen
>
> On 20 September 2017 at 13:49, Alan Bateman
> wrote:
> > On 20/09/2017 13:43, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> >>
And just noting that the thread in March did not call out the fact
that the webrev did not correspond to the original agreed change from
Mark/jigsaw-dev. The only way you'd have spotted the package was
javax.annotation.processing and not java.lang.annotation is by
clicking on the webrev itself. Sor
On 20/09/2017 13:58, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Ouch. Thats an unpleasant result. It should have gone in `java.lang.annotation`.
Stephen
That was the original suggestion but that package is more for
annotations types that are used as meta annotations (@Native should have
gone elsewhere but we c
On 20 September 2017 at 14:22, Alan Bateman wrote:
> That was the original suggestion but that package is more for annotations
> types that are used as meta annotations (@Native should have gone elsewhere
> but we can't change that now).
A point acknowledged by
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/piperm
This one?
http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/api/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.html
/Michael
On Sep 20, 2017 18:44, "Stephen Colebourne" wrote:
> As per this email:
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2017-
> February/011365.html
> the idea was to add a new annotat
