Project Lambda: Java Language Specification draft 0.1.5

[Paul Benedict]

To your definition of the PLS, I don't think there is an official
definition. However, exempting the native types of Java, everything is
an object (even methods). To have over a decade of Java invoking
methods on objects, and then suddenly introducing an unnamed method --
and not requiring a method name -- can't thwart objections under the
tarp of "it's a new language feature".

On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot
<reinier at zwitserloot.com> wrote:
> That's not the principle of least surprise. The PLS means: If a significant
> chunk of those people using it think a certain library call or construct
> does X, and believe this is sufficiently logic to not immediately dive for
> the documentation, but this call or construct actually does Y, that's a
> violation of PLS. That's _clearly_ not happening here. The only possible
> expectation here is that "foo.()" is simply invalid syntax, but this
> argument feels like weak tea to me: You can make that argument against just
> about every new language feature.