Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think?
glen herrmannsfeldt wrote but callously failed to attribute his citations:
Lew wrote:
(snip)
Class 6 Extends 14 {} <=== Tsukino Usagi wrote
abstract class Peano { } <=== rossum wrote
class 0 extends Peano { }
(snip)
And that's relevant because ... ?
Do you think they'll suddenly allow leading digits in class
identifiers for Java code? I think not.
As I remember, all unicode [sic] letters are allowed. There are plenty
As I looked up in the JLS, that's not true. Leading digits are not permitte=
d.
"An identifier is an unlimited-length sequence of Java letters and Java dig=
its, the first of which must be a Java letter."
<http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-3.html#jls-3.8>
The JLS trumps your memory.
that could be confusing to readers. Maybe there aren't any that
look like roman digits, though. There are many that look like,
but aren't the same character as, roman alphabet letters.
But those characters are not used to represent integers, so are not germane=
to this conversation.
The question at hand was the potential legitimization of glyphs that repres=
ent integers to be used as class names that inherit from other classes. Tho=
se glyphs are not currently allowed to be leading characters of identifiers=
, so unless that changes, rossum's construct will never be legal.
--
Lew