Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #7815
| From | Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: new Java lambda syntax |
| Date | 2011-09-11 20:14 +0100 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <tsdvj8-vbg.ln1@news.simpsonst.f2s.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <alpine.DEB.2.00.1109101445260.18967@urchin.earth.li> <llbsj8-b59.ln1@news.simpsonst.f2s.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1109111255530.13018@urchin.earth.li> <9j3vj8-aqe.ln1@news.simpsonst.f2s.com> <j4item$o69$1@news.albasani.net> |
On 11/09/11 19:08, BGB wrote:
> I would have also liked to see lexical variable capture.
> FFS, I added this (along with closures) to a C compiler before, can't
> be too hard
At this stage, I don't think the issue is how, but whether/when to
permit it.
All suggestions for how seem to come down to boxing:
* arrays of length 1
* hidden local classes
* AtomicInteger, etc
(If there were any others, I didn't understand them.)
The options for when/whether have been:
* never
* always
* when a local is tagged with @Shared, public or similar
* when the SAM parameter is tagged with @Callback, @Block or similar
They've gone for 'never' because it's sufficient to meet their primary
goals of supporting concurrent APIs, especially on collections, and they
want to encourage good concurrent practices. They can still look at the
other options later - it would be harder to withdraw an advanced
feature, having discovered it was a bad idea.
> having spent more of my time using languages with much nicer
> first-class functions (yes, I will include C here, as well as
> JavaScript and similar...), having to have extra syntax (both to
> declare and use these types) is IMO lame.
>
> in all cases, one would type "obj(args)".
>
> idiomatic for Java or not, the more compact declarations and
> invocations are more what people who use most other languages are
> likely to expect (and ideally the compiler can be smart enough to
> figure out what "obj(args)" with a SAM means).
Lambda declarations are already quite compact, with type inference
helping in most cases.
new Thread(() -> { doSomething(); }).start(); // Runnable implied
For invocations, having to type obj.run() instead of obj() is hardly
onerous. Plus, invocations will be much rarer than lambda
declarations. Also note that the invocation site is unaware of whether
the object is a lambda.
--
ss at comp dot lancs dot ac dot uk
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
new Java lambda syntax markspace <-@.> - 2011-09-08 13:19 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-08 15:18 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-08 18:27 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-08 15:40 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-08 19:27 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-08 16:29 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-08 19:48 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-09-08 17:56 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-08 22:23 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-09-08 16:41 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-09-08 20:50 -0500
Re: new Java lambda syntax bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2011-09-09 09:33 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-09-10 14:48 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-10 16:17 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-09-11 13:06 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-11 17:18 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-11 11:08 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-11 20:14 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-11 14:08 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-09-11 17:07 -0500
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-11 16:18 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-09-13 02:00 +0200
Re: new Java lambda syntax Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-12 20:59 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-09-12 21:24 -0500
Re: new Java lambda syntax Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-09-13 21:04 +0200
Re: new Java lambda syntax Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-09-13 15:22 -0500
Re: new Java lambda syntax Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-09-13 23:25 +0200
Re: new Java lambda syntax Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-09-13 21:29 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-09-13 23:26 +0200
Re: new Java lambda syntax supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-13 20:25 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-09-15 21:58 +0100
Re: new Java lambda syntax Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-09-13 21:36 -0500
Re: new Java lambda syntax supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-13 22:49 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax "supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations" <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-14 02:49 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-14 03:01 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax "winkleMeister" <..00@00.00.00.1> - 2011-09-14 09:59 +0000
Re: new Java lambda syntax supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-15 10:16 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-14 06:40 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-15 10:16 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax lightworker <etts@0n.org.null> - 2011-09-16 01:57 +0000
Re: new Java lambda syntax thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-15 22:41 -0400
Re: new Java lambda syntax Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-09-14 06:29 -0300
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-14 07:40 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-14 08:01 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-14 14:50 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-14 18:02 -0700
Re: new Java lambda syntax BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-09-14 21:08 -0700
csiph-web