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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #20936

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

Show all headers | View raw

On 01/02/2013 09:40 PM, Lew wrote:
> 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.
>
Well, we can agree on one thing - absent hard numbers - which I'm not 
sure exist - none of us have more than anecdotes.

I'll say this - I've worked closely with hundreds of programmers over my 
career. Not just Java, obviously, everything under the sun. I've 
interviewed many dozens of developers. I've seen a humungous amount of 
code written by other people. I read professionally voraciously.

These same statements are probably applicable to you and a bunch of 
other people in this NG too.

_My_ takeaway from all that is that most professional working 
programmers are M-F 9-5. They don't actually spend time at home coding 
or doing professional development (with the exception of training or 
reading books that help them with the immediate technologies that they 
need *now*). They don't have more than an above-average grasp of 
anything, they aren't even that interested in the field.

So no, I don't believe for a second that more than 5 or 10 percent of 
coders play with experimental features or learn languages that they may 
never use on the job...let alone teach themselves CS underpinnings of 
what they do.

But this is all anecdotal. You may have all your career worked with 
young hard-chargers who absolutely live to code. You'd see things 
differently.

As for *me*, the new _language_ features in Java 7 don't exactly take 
more than a few hours to read about and trial out in a simple test 
program. I spent rather more time investigating the new APIs in 7, so I 
know what's there and can plan to use it if appropriate.

As for what is coming out in 8, I could not care less. I really could 
not. I'm not using 8 yet, and none of my Java work (which these days is 
a small bit of what I do) will even be on the Java 8 platform for years. 
So why waste my time? I'd rather hone up on Scala, Clojure, latest C#, 
and F#...to name a few.

AHS

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