transparent lambda

[Neal Gafter]

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Peter Levart <peter.levart at marand.si> wrote:

> I have a feeling that this might be it (provided that it is acceptable).
> With this we can satisfy both camps:


It's not too bad, but I have two concerns.

First, I think the ambiguities around the trinary expression are a little
hairy.  Second, when put together with expression lambdas, it is a little
noisy.

I didn't do anything like this in CfJ 0.6b, because it isn't really so bad
just doing it yourself.  Is there really a camp clamoring for a lambda form
that is both transparent and which has an early exit?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/closures-dev/attachments/20100108/43ba8ed1/attachment.html