Why we should not add readonly to Java (yet)

by John Boyland.

Abstract

In this paper, I examine some of reasons that ``readonly'' style qualifiers have been proposed for Java, and also the principles behind the rules for these new qualifiers. I find that there is a mismatch between some of the motivating problems and the proposed solutions. Thus I urge Java designers to proceed with caution when adopting a solution to these sets of problems.

BibTeX Style Reference

@inproceedings(boyland:05readonly,
  title = {Why we should not add readonly to {Java} (yet)},
  author =      {John Boyland},
  booktitle = 	{ECOOP 2005 Workshop on Formal Techniques for
	         Java-like Programs},
  editor = 	{Francesco Logozzo and Jan Vitek},
  month = 	jul,
  year = 	2005,
  nothing =	{})

@article(boyland:06readonly,
  title = {Why we should not add readonly to {Java} (yet)},
  author =      {John Boyland},
  journal = "Journal of Object Technology",
  volume = 5,
  number = 5,
  note = "Special issue: ECOOP 2005 Workshop FTfJP",
  month = jun,
  year = 2006,
  pages = "5-29",
  nothing = {})

How to Get a Copy

A PDF preprint is available here. The slides for the presentation are also available; the slides include 15 slides not used at the presentation, and also reflect verbal corrections made during the talk to reflect Javari 2005.

The complete version of the article is available from the JOT web site. The complete version includes three alternative proposals:

  1. Fix Javari 2005;
  2. Use ownership instead;
  3. Use permissions instead.


Last Modified: September 27, 2006

Why we should not add readonly to Java (yet) / boyland@cs.uwm.edu