Feedback and comments on ARM proposal (original) (raw)

Neal Gafter neal at gafter.com
Thu Mar 19 17:33:25 PDT 2009

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Joshua Bloch <jjb at google.com> wrote:

With all due respect, I don't see a lot of people disagreeing; I see one person disagreeing vociferously.  For the most part, others are discussing the details to make sure that we do a good job on important cases.

Is "one person disagreeing" something like "one hand clapping"?

If this was directed at me, I'm not sure what you feel I was disagreeing about. I was analyzing the proposal's interactions with other language features (iteration, in this case), noting issues, and making specific suggestions to address them. I find this comment offensive, especially considering your disagreement with Howard and Jeremy about declaration scope rather than a new block-structured statement form, or with me and Peter and Stefan about whether Lock is an important use case, or with me and Bob Lee about whether suppressed exceptions be handled by clients, etc. I think we can respectfully discuss the issues while moving the process forward without making it personal.

I'm still hoping to see a revision of the proposal that incorporates the changes you suggested be considered: the changes to the Disposable interface, support for an expression as well as a declaration, a variation to suppress the exception on close, and recording suppressed exceptions. When do you anticipate a refinement of the proposal will include these for further analysis?

More information about the coin-dev mailing list