Summary: Lambda syntax

[Stefan Schulz]

Am 19.03.2010 01:04, schrieb Alex Blewitt:
> There are inconsistencies in 7, 16 and 17. One is missing a "throws",
> one declares that it uses PipedException but then uses commas, and one
> has another error I have forgotten (another missing throws?)

Fixed 7 and 17 (had "Throws" instead of "Exceptions").
In 16 I don't see any error. As the examples (unfortunately?) only 
always have at max one exception, there is no need for pipes.

> In addition, the example with "new" probably shouldn't be included,
> since it's not valid for all lambdas, regardless of the syntax used for
> representing the lambdas themselves.

The new word is part of the syntax (cf. to Howard's post).

Stefan