Projec Coin: Post-Devoxx Update, closures and exception handling

As has been announced recently at Devoxx and covered in various places, including threads on the coin-dev mailing list, Mark Reinhold made several announcements about JDK 7 at this year's Devoxx:

  1. JDK 7 will have a form of closures.

  2. The JDK 7 schedule is being extended to fall 2010.

On the first announcement, the coin-dev list is not the appropriate forum to discuss closures in Java. Closures are hereby decreed as off-topic for coin-dev.

Mark's blog entry "Closures for Java" invites those with an informed opinion to participate in the current discussion; watch Mark's blog for news about creation of a new list or project, etc., to host this closures effort.

On the second announcement, while the JDK 7 schedule has been extended, many of the current final five (or so) Project Coin features have not yet been fully implemented, specified, and tested. Therefore, there will not be a general reassessment of Project Coin feature selection or another call for proposals in JDK 7. The final five (or so) proposals remain selected for inclusion in JDK 7 and work will continue to complete those features. However, given its technical merit and the possibility of providing useful infrastructure for ARM, improved exception handling is now being reconsidered for inclusion in JDK 7. No other "for further consideration" proposal is under reconsideration.

Comments:

There is also an openjdk sub-project named closure with an already existing mailing list:
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/closures/

It was initially set up to implement BGGA closure but I think it can be used as shell of the new proposal.

Posted by Rémi Forax on November 30, 2009 at 02:42 AM PST #

Improved Exception Handling would be oh so sweet!

Posted by Brian on November 30, 2009 at 02:59 AM PST #

I'm thrilled that improved exception handling is being reconsidered for JDK7 features list. This feature would clearly improve nearly all non-trivial Java source code. I certainly hope that you can find the resources to get this implemented.

Posted by katz on November 30, 2009 at 02:59 AM PST #

I'm surprised that ARM isn't being folded into the closure work.

Posted by Peter von der Ahé on November 30, 2009 at 03:00 AM PST #

ARM can't be folded into the closure work if the closure work being considered has ruled out the possibility for library-defined control structures.

But I certainly think that library-defined control structures would be a great idea, and the relationship between ARM and closures should be considered, for example how Ruby manages this.

(I, of course, am a nobody when it comes to language design.)

Posted by Ken Bloom on November 30, 2009 at 03:45 AM PST #

Reconsidering improved exception handling is really some great news!

Posted by Vedran on November 30, 2009 at 02:54 PM PST #

Regarding the Improved Exceptions feature. Why does it use

try {
} (Exception1 e | Exception2 f) {
..
}

Instead of the more obvious:

try {
} (Exception1 e , Exception2 f) {
..
}

or

try {
} (Exception1 e ; Exception2 f) {
.. // i prefer the comma
}

The comma is used for parameter passing, why would we use OR for this? And why a unary OR ??

Posted by dog on December 01, 2009 at 08:47 AM PST #

I'm really glad to hear the news about improved exception handling. It would make my real world projects much cleaner to read, and eliminate a lot of copy-and-paste programming for me.

I like the | syntax myself. To me, it seems to be the most natural way of saying Exception1 OR Exception2 OR etc...

Posted by David Kopp on December 03, 2009 at 03:55 AM PST #

Post a Comment:
Comments are closed for this entry.
About

darcy

Search

Archives
« April 2014
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   
       
Today
News

No bookmarks in folder

Blogroll