If you see sealed types in isolation yes, but once you think that the compiler will check exhaustiveness of a switch using those names, the names has to be stable and human readable.
Remi On October 25, 2019 10:34:04 AM UTC, Peter Levart <[email protected]> wrote: > > >On 10/10/19 12:13 AM, Remi Forax wrote: >> I agree, PermittedSubtypes should only contain stable names :) > >Well, since inference always happens inside a compilation unit, even >"unstable" names are OK as all the classes in compilation unit are >(re)compiled together. > > >Regards, Peter > >> >> Rémi >> >> ----- Mail original ----- >>> De: "Brian Goetz" <[email protected]> >>> À: "amber-spec-experts" <[email protected]> >>> Envoyé: Mercredi 9 Octobre 2019 23:35:48 >>> Objet: Re: [sealed] Sealed local classes? >>>> Proposal: ban `sealed` and `non-sealed` modifiers on _local_ >classes >>>> and interfaces. >>> And we would want to extend the ban we have for the other two forms >of >>> "subclasses inside implementations", lambdas and inner classes, to >local >>> classes. -- Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec Courriel K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
