Field and Method Literals

[Neal Gafter]

On Sunday, April 17, 2011, Chris Beams <cbeams at vmware.com> wrote:
> Method (and field) literals seem to me an obvious addition to the language; I've often wondered why they weren't there from the beginning, just as class literals have been.  Is there a theoretical reason why they should not or cannot be introduced?  I would think they are more fundamental than any closure proposal, and that closure proposals would build atop field/method literal support as opposed to the other way around.

Chris-

The sort of method literals you're looking for - of type
java.lang.reflect.Method - have very little to do with anything
proposed for closures.  The only thing they have in common is that the
same syntax has been proposed for both.

Cheers,
Neal