Fun with method references

[Nathan Bryant]

I'd thought that MethodHandles were type checked at runtime, and that
function types built on top of them could also express primitives.

Perhaps you are reacting to the "round trip through generics" aspect of
the presentation that's recently been referred to, or that some of the
proposals to date have implemented function types as translation to
generic SAMs named Function0, Function1, etc. But surely this is not the
only possible implementation choice.

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Goetz [mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 4:22 PM
To: Nathan Bryant
Cc: Neal Gafter; lambda-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: Fun with method references

Adding non-reified function types would be even worse in that regard.

On 8/6/2010 4:20 PM, Nathan Bryant wrote:
> It also makes the transition to reified generics worse, by adding new
> non-reified types to the standard library.
>
> Neal Gafter wrote:
>> Adding SAMs now instead makes the transition to function types worse.
>
>