On Tue, 7 May 2024 16:09:08 GMT, Pavel Rappo <pra...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I do not think the step to "standardise" a preview feature exists ? When a >> preview feature becomes a released feature, the code is very lightly edited, >> at least it this is my experience. >> >> You can change both readln and readLine and if `java.io.IO` is removed, at >> least the code of readLine() will be > >> I do not think the step to "standardise" a preview feature exists ? When a >> preview feature becomes a released feature, the code is very lightly edited, >> at least it this is my experience. > > We may call it differently, but I think both you and I are referring to this > part of [JEP 12](https://openjdk.org/jeps/12) (emphasis mine): > >> Eventually, the JEP owner must decide the preview feature's fate. If the >> decision is to remove the preview feature, then the owner must file an issue >> in JBS to remove the feature in the next JDK feature release; no new JEP is >> needed. **On the other hand, if the decision is to finalize, then the owner >> must file a new JEP, noting refinements informed by developer feedback. The >> title of this JEP should be the feature's name, omitting the earlier suffix >> of (Preview) / (Second Preview), and without adding any new suffix such as >> (Standard) or (Final). This JEP will ultimately reach Targeted status for >> the next JDK feature release.** > >> You can change both readln and readLine and if `java.io.IO` is removed, at >> least the code of readLine() will be > > Sorry, Rémi, but no. As long as this feature is in preview, I'd optimise for > easier removal (back out) of the feature rather than clean combined code. Okay ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19112#discussion_r1593013670
