On 12/11/18 3:08 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
>
> Before we get to the harder ones, can people share what made them
> uncomfortable, for the ones where you marked "not comfortable with the
> answer"?
>
As I hinted at in off-list response to Brian, my remaining discomfort is
that flow-scoping could be
> I use workarounds for lack of flow-scoping all the time in concurrent
> code to statically ensure a single binding to locals (no field re-reads)
> but where some of them are conditional. The way I usually do this
> requires C-like declaration plus inline conditional assignment. As in
> this sni
- Mail original -
> De: "Brian Goetz"
> À: "amber-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mardi 11 Décembre 2018 21:08:38
> Objet: Flow scoping
> (Note to observers: we did an internal survey so I could gauge the
> comfort level of the EG with the flow scoping rules for pattern binding
> variables.
> On Dec 16, 2018, at 12:32 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
>
> at the same time, not introducing a variable in the scope avoid tricky use
> cases like
>
> class A {
>Object a;
>
>void m(Object o)
> if (o instanceof A a) {
>System.out.println(a); // o at runtime
> } else {
> De: "Brian Goetz"
> À: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Dimanche 16 Décembre 2018 18:49:47
> Objet: Re: Flow scoping
>> On Dec 16, 2018, at 12:32 PM, Remi Forax < [ mailto:fo...@univ-mlv.fr |
>> fo...@univ-mlv.fr ] > wrote:
>> at the same time, not introducing a variable in
