> Nobody demanded anything, if we want to play word games. People asked for lightweight concurrency, better FFI, faster startup, value classes etc.. How could

> Nobody demanded anything, if we want to play word games. People asked for lightweight concurrency, better FFI, faster startup, value classes etc.. How could we have done any of that without the integrity work? It's like saying, nobody asked you to make noise and dust to lay down cable ducts, we just asked for fast internet. > The java philosophy of final, makes software less extensible. This is the point; to have less overriding. Regardless of what the voting body decides (the meaning of users being subtly repurposed), the feature is anti-developer-agency past the point of healthy balance. There's absolutely no capability that this JEP removes (also, you seem to be confusing final classes/methods with final fields). All it does is say that the minority of programs that want to mutate final fields just have to tell the JVM about it so that it won't apply some future optimisation. Nothing is being taken away. The JEP is: if you're mutating finals, you can continue to do so; if you're not -- you'll eventually get better performance. What's not to like?