Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #20894

Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final?

Show all headers | View raw

Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> Saxo wrote:
>>> So free variables aren't possible with JDK8 lambdas. For people used to closures, this is surely
>>> surprising. Well, this does not render JDK8 lambdas useless. On the contrary, an imense amount of
>>> boilerplate code that is necessary without them can be removed with them. Once the JDK8 gets
>>> released this will be an eye-opener to
>>> about 95% of all Java developers (the ratio of Java developers not understanding closures ...).
> 
>> The ratio of Java developers who do not understand closures is probably pretty close to the
>> ratio of Java developers who do not understand Java.
> 
> [ SNIP ]

> 
> I don't get that statement at all. A significant percentage of Java 

You mean you don't agree with it. Apparently you do get it.

> programmers don't use any other languages in a big way, including those

How significant? What percentage? Aren't these the same ones I said don't understand 
Java either?

How do you know they aren't?

> that do have closures. And since Java itself doesn't have them (*), I 
> just don't see why a programmer who understand Java really well can't 
> also *not* know about closures.

Can, certainly. But the statement was statistical, not possibilistic.

Where does "95%" come from? Where does "significant percentage" come from?

My point is that there are no data for these assertions. Likewise, I have no data, but 
unless you do you have nothing with which to refute my assertion.

Plus there's the aforementioned matter of agreeing on definitions.
> 
> * I'll wager that a lot of Java programmers - the ones with their hands 

How much is "a lot"? Does it approach 95%?

> full still doing their production work in JDK 1.6 and 1.7, say, don't 
> have time to play with experimental features.

I have my hands full doing production work in JDK 1.6 and 1.7. Yet I do play with 
experimental features, and even read about them beyond that.

Doesn't everyone? Don't you?

Anyone who doesn't, doesn't understand Java.

-- 
Lew

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? jeti789@web.de - 2013-01-02 07:08 -0800
  Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? jeti789@web.de - 2013-01-02 07:52 -0800
  Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-02 17:33 +0000
    Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Saxo <jeti789@web.de> - 2013-01-02 11:31 -0800
      Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 12:52 -0800
        Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-01-02 20:58 -0400
          Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 17:40 -0800
            Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-01-03 20:43 -0400
        Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Saxo <jeti789@web.de> - 2013-01-02 23:44 -0800
          Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2013-01-03 07:57 -0800
            Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-03 13:22 -0800
              Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2013-01-03 16:14 -0800
      Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-02 21:46 +0000
        Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 17:35 -0800
        Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Saxo <jeti789@web.de> - 2013-01-03 02:13 -0800
          Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Saxo <jeti789@web.de> - 2013-01-03 06:45 -0800
            Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-04 21:32 +0000
              Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2013-01-04 14:38 -0800
                Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-04 23:45 +0000
                Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2013-01-04 17:24 -0800
                Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-05 13:20 +0000
              Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Saxo <jeti789@web.de> - 2013-01-05 01:50 -0800
                Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-05 11:21 +0000
                Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Saxo <jeti789@web.de> - 2013-01-05 04:27 -0800
                Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final? Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-01-05 12:58 +0000

csiph-web