Move to jspecify?

[iloveeclipse]

See https://jspecify.dev/blog/release-1.0.0/

I personally always disliked the fact that we had 42 different NP annotation libraries in Java.
I wonder if 1) we can move to jspecify annotations and 2) also configure them to be default instead of jdt annotations in JDT UI.

@stephan-herrmann : you are the expert in this area, WDYT?

[stephan-herrmann]

I have waited many years for a standard to emerge, ten years only for TYPE_USE annotations getting attention by others.

I will certainly look at the new kid on the block, even though it is not a standard.

Whether or not it is feasible to switch to those annotations without breaking users of JDT needs to be determined. While I was still involved in that initiative it didn't look like compatibility with prior art was high on their agenda, but I believe this has changed to some degree in the time since.

Just to call out the reason for my reluctance: it is not just about the fully qualified name of annotations, it is also very much about semantics which likely differs in many details.

[stephan-herrmann]

on ...

See https://jspecify.dev/blog/release-1.0.0/

... I see:

"We're still working on updating the specification to reflect all of our design decisions (ETA: end of August), but that's more useful to nullness analyzer implementers."

We still have to wait for this.

[stephan-herrmann]

Unfortunately, jspecify doesn't help even for the long standing discussion on @LazyNonNull or whatever its name, see #2829

[laeubi]

I just recently stumbled over JEP draft: Null-Restricted Value Class Types (Preview)

I personally always disliked the fact that we had 42 different NP annotation libraries in Java.

The problems with "standards" is they tend to proliferate

https://xkcd.com/927

[stephan-herrmann]

See #390 and for a partial step #3434