John O'Conner: I have nothing technical to add to the debate. However, I have been monitoring the recent java.net poll that asks "How important is it to you that JDK 7 offers a new property syntax?" The results so far seem to indicate that almost two-thirds of the voters just don't need a new syntax. A minority, just 15%, think it's "very important" to the Java platform. They're a small but vocal group.
The poll may have flaws. It may not be scientifically valid or useful. However, it does provide some anecdotal evidence, and I'll take any evidence I can get. A new syntax for properties? I don't particularly need it, and so far the poll results suggest that most of you don't need it either.
The problem about polls such as this one is that it is almost always innertia driven. If Java.net did a poll in 1994 on whether a new object-oriented language such as Java is needed, I bet a majority of OO programmers then will say no.
First class properties and events go hand-in-hand in providing an important abstraction for component based programming, something that we can do in the current version of Java through conventions, Just like C++ supported the definition of interfaces as classes with nothing but pure virtual functions.
By elevating the property and event constructs onto the language level, we are promoting a different style of design and programming. Not everyone is using this style of design. But for the people who are using it, the addition will make their design more clear. Think how Java's elevation of the C++ interface convention into a language construct promoted interface based design to a whole new level.
Previous Topic
