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


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #20930

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

X-Received by 10.66.80.200 with SMTP id t8mr8711080pax.1.1357248139725; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:22:19 -0800 (PST)
Received by 10.50.163.66 with SMTP id yg2mr16960963igb.0.1357248139469; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:22:19 -0800 (PST)
Path csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.ripco.com!rahul.net!wasp.rahul.net!rahul.net!news.kjsl.com!usenet.stanford.edu!b8no1372588pbd.0!news-out.google.com!s9ni72755pbb.0!nntp.google.com!f6no8253280pbd.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Date Thu, 3 Jan 2013 13:22:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To <IJGdnZN45MnKN3jNnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Complaints-To groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.28.149.29; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T
NNTP-Posting-Host 69.28.149.29
References <c885bedb-977c-49b4-a10a-b9cdd3df1dd9@googlegroups.com> <m0sdr9-0tg.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> <9f030e71-96ab-4ead-9690-4369f4a19aa9@googlegroups.com> <pk7er9-i4j.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> <d6fdb884-3181-4b37-a011-6da19e649758@googlegroups.com> <fde9fe58-48de-46e6-96bc-fdefcc13628f@googlegroups.com> <66de9d0d-fe7c-45ba-bdb9-5a8816fc486b@googlegroups.com> <closure-20130103091221@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <IJGdnZN45MnKN3jNnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
User-Agent G2/1.0
MIME-Version 1.0
Message-ID <9e51b5c4-4451-4ae0-92ca-de8e014a2123@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: Why is that in JDK8: value used in lambda expression shuld be effectively final?
From Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
Injection-Date Thu, 03 Jan 2013 21:22:19 +0000
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:20930

Show key headers only | View raw


Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> Stefan Ram wrote:
>> Saxo writes:
>>> What I mean is that almost every Java developer I met during
>>> the last 10 years didn't know what I meant when I said it's a
>>> pitty that Java does not have closures.

On this newsgroup there've been spirited discussions on this topic for years.

In my experience over the last ten years lots and lots of Java programmers, most 
of the ones with whom I've spoken, knew what closures were if they were reasonably 
competent Java programmers.

But I don't claim statistical significance for my non-random idiosyncratic sample. 
You should not either.

The fact that my experience is the opposite of yours should be evidence for that.

For the record, I argued vehemently against the addition of closures to Java. 

I tend to agree with Stefan here.

>>    Clojure already exists, and everyone who wants to program
>>    the LISP style is free to choose LISP or Clojure.
> 
>>    Using LISP style in Java is not necessarily good Java style!
> 
>>    For a Java programmer, good knowledge of Java is already
>>    sufficient. He does not need to know terminology of other
>>    languages!

Wrong.

> ...
> I would distinguish different levels of programming skill. If one is
> going to be making decisions such as choosing the language for a
> project, it is important to understand the capabilities and supported
> programming styles for a wide variety of languages.
> 
> Similarly, anyone working in programming language design and
> standardization should understand the possibilities that have been
> demonstrated by other languages.
> 
> For someone who is just programming in one language, it is enough to
> know that language well.

Wrong.

It is not enough.

Because people who learn only Java tend not to even program Java well.

That I've seen. I don't know if that has statistical significance.

But based on my experience and much reading and the advice of mentors, 
I will state unequivocally that knowledge of only Java makes a terrible computer 
programmer.

Simply terrible.

Any real programmer would have learned at *least* one other language, usually 
prior to learning Java, and would understand things like computable pointers.

Anyone who calls themselves a programmer and is unwilling to learn a second programming 
language is an ass and needs to switch to serving fries to fast-food customers.

-- 
Lew

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious 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