On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:16:40 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Defining a value object as an instance of non-abstract value classes works 
>> here, it's similar to the wording in the changes for the JLS.
>
> I would prefer to phrase it like "the class of a value object is a value 
> class", more in line with code like `o.getClass().isValue()`.
> 
> However, Valhalla models "identity" as the extra thing, so I guess it is 
> better to go like "An identity object is an object whose class is an identity 
> class or an array type. All other objects are value objects."

I would prefer to keep this sentence as proposed as it keeps it consistent with 
the JLS and keeps the ordering that the terms are introduces consistent with 
the first sentence. I would be a bit wary of "All other objects are value 
objects" as it hints that there are other things that are also value classes.

-------------

PR Review Comment: 
https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/2588#discussion_r3498758369

Reply via email to