On Jun 2, 2021, at 7:57 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.go...@oracle.com> wrote: > > A minor bikeshed comment: We're asking users to change their `new Object()` > to `IdentityObject.newIdentity()`, and they may ask "why do I have to say > 'Identity' twice"? (And by ask, I mean grumble, because we're already asking > them to change their working code.) > > After a few minutes of thought, I think it might be a better fit to put this > at Objects::newIdentity. The methods in Objects are conveniences that users > could write themselves, which this basically is -- there's nothing special > about this method, other than having a preferred alternative to `new > Object()` which users will understand. So parking this where the Object > conveniences go seems slightly lower friction.
I think this is OK. As a stretch move, I think we can even retro-upgrade the type checking of Objects::newIdentity with type variable trickery, when IdentityObject becomes real. Please see: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/secure/attachment/95170/Foo.java https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8268919 — John
