Method references with types [Re: lambda syntax tutorial]
Mikael Grev
grev at miginfocom.com
Thu Aug 5 14:31:30 PDT 2010
A really clear version would be
#Foo.bar(...)
Expressing clearly that anything goes as parameter.
On Aug 5, 2010, at 23:08 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
> It has been mentioned, but only on whiteboards so far :)
>
> We are for this reason considering #foo.bar() instead of #foo.bar. We are
> also considering a greedy prefix syntax instead of infix.
>
> On 8/5/2010 3:57 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>> No one has yet mentioned another danger with using Foo#bar instead of
>> Foo#bar(String).
>>
>> The former choice at this point closes off options in the future for Java.
>>
>> Foo#bar is the only sensible syntax for a field literal. Java can have
>> both fields and methods with the same name. This has the potential to
>> be a limitation to future language development.
>>
>> If there is a positive decision here today that field literals will
>> never be added (and that any future property literals will never
>> clash) then fine, but that seems like a strong statement at this
>> point.
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>>
>> On 5 August 2010 19:08, Nathan Bryant<nathan.bryant at linkshare.com> wrote:
>>> Kevin Bourrillion wrote:
>>> Ø For example, if Foo#bar has no contextual smarts at all, then adding overload #2 of any method would always be source-incompatible (which would be hideous!). So how much intelligence does it have?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The worst-case of overloading always producing breakage can be ruled out; the set of possible overloads can only include those that have SAM types that are compatible with any of the overloads of Foo#bar .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From there, resolution should proceed in the usual way (most specific wins, or else the programmer must disambiguate.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In order for the worst ambiguities to arise, Foo.bar and the target method must both be overloaded. Is this really that common of a case? Any lesser ambiguities are the ones that can also arise with the lambda parameter type inference that is already implemented.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
More information about the lambda-dev
mailing list