Closures for Java (0.6) specification part b

[Jonathan Gibbons]

Ouch. That's pretty subtle, especially as the statement in a control 
invocation form is defined to use an expression lambda instead of a 
statement lambda. 

-- Jon




Neal Gafter wrote:
> That's not the case.  In a statement lambda, all three are local.  In 
> an expression lambda, they are nonlocal.
>
> Cheers,
> Neal
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Gibbons 
> <Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com <mailto:Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com>> wrote:
>
>     Neal,
>
>     As much as I like control flow abstraction, it seems that your
>     proposal 0.6b leaves us in a half-way house with respect to
>     control flow keywords.   Using the 'for' modifier, 'break' and
>     'continue' get to work as expected, but it would appear that
>     'return' is still local to the lambda function, which is mildly
>     icky.  Have you considered this issue?
>
>     -- Jon
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/closures-dev/attachments/20091214/f40f5bf0/attachment.html