closures after all?

[Rémi Forax]

This is because the syntax of the new proposal is very close to the FCM 
syntax.

FCM closure:
#(int x, int y) { return x + y; }

|Proposed lambda expression or lambda statement (v0.6a):
||#(int x, int y) x + y;
or
||#(int x, int y) { return x + y; }|


FCM function type:
|#(int(int, int)) plus;|

proposed function type (v0.6a):|
#int(int, int) plus;|

closure conversion and method reference are also identical.

This new proposal can be seen as a simplified BGGA (for the underlying 
type system)
with the FCM syntax.

In my opinion the only flaw of this new proposal is that function types 
are not reified.
So expect warning on cast and no way to do an instanceof on a function type.

Rémi


Le 18/11/2009 23:26, Mark Mahieu a écrit :
> Quite a few others seem to believe it'll be FCM (eg. http://java.dzone.com/news/devoxx-day-3-conference-day-1).
>
> Chinese whispers abound :)
>
>
> On 18 Nov 2009, at 21:59, Jorge Ortiz wrote:
>
>    
>> This link has been floating around Twitter.
>>
>> http://www.javac.info/closures-v06a.html
>>
>> --j
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Joseph D. Darcy<Joe.Darcy at sun.com>  wrote:
>>
>>      
>>> Serge Boulay wrote:
>>>        
>>>> Maybe reading into this too much, but are closures in pipe after all?
>>>>
>>>> http://puredanger.com/tech/2009/11/18/closures-after-all/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> I'm attending Devoxx as a speaker this year, as has been reported in
>>> various outlets, Mark Reinhold announced today at Devoxx that JDK 7 will
>>> have closures, a to-be-developed from of closures smaller than BGGA, and
>>> that the JDK 7 schedule will also be extended until around September 2010.
>>>
>>> More details will be forthcoming,
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>      
>
>