[jsr294-modularity-eg] Runtime model

[Andreas Sterbenz]

Bryan Atsatt wrote:
> 
> Andreas Sterbenz wrote:
>> Bryan Atsatt wrote:
>>> Given a class that represents a superpackage at runtime:
>>>
>>> public class SuperPackage {
>> We have not really gotten to details of the reflective API yet. Alex and I 
>> will send out a proposal soon.
> 
> Wow. (Contrary to how I feel at the moment, I'll do my best to remain 
> professional in my response here.)
> 
> I've been operating under the assumption that this process is a 
> *collaboration*. Apparently that is mistaken.
> 
> I can only read your response to mean that you see the EG as nothing but 
>   reviewers of the work product created by the spec lead(s). That 
> certainly fits the pattern so far.
> 
> If this is in fact your intention, please let us know. Then each of us 
> will be able to make an informed decision about continuing to "participate".

Of course it is a collaborative process.

All I tried to say is that Alex and I have already been working on a 
complete proposal for the reflective API for some time. It will soon be 
ready and when it is, we will send it out. If you want to send out a full 
proposal of your own, you are welcome to do so.

As for the suggestion of changing the semantics of existing class files, 
that is a rather fundamental issue. We can discuss the issues I raised, 
but we all have to be aware that this is a language JSR. What we do needs 
to be consistent with the principles in the current language 
specifications and people's expectation of Java language programs that 
they formed over the past 10 years. That limits our design space.

Andreas.