capturing (or not) mutable local variables

[Brian Goetz]

The language and platform are moving forward plenty.  I realize there are 
those who would like to see it move forward faster, and as a Java programmer, 
I have some sympathy for that position.  You are welcome to state your 
opinions here, and make your case.  But at some point, by continuing to argue 
in this forum, you are *holding back* the platform by interfering with those 
that are actually moving it forward.



On 11/23/2010 9:47 AM, Jesse Sightler wrote:
> It's simple... there's a feeling out there that java can no longer move
> forward because the language cannot change due to controversy.
>
> If the modest "controversy" over this is enough to hold it back, it will only
> serve to feed that fire, IMO.
>
> I mean seriously, we have people in here who think that a small thing like
> this should be in the roadmap for JFK 9 (~2016-2018).  :-)
>
> On Nov 23, 2010 9:39 AM, "Brian Goetz" <brian.goetz at oracle.com
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>> wrote:
>  >>> In a parellel world, this idiom is irretrievably broken.
>  >>
>  >> I fear that such an extreme focus on concurrent programming is rather
>  >> unhealthy for a general-purpose language.
>  >
>  > How can you possibly (with a straight face) describe the choice to *not* add a
>  > controversial feature as being an "unhealthily extreme focus"? Seems to me
>  > the rhetoric in this discussion has left the realm of reality.
>  >
>  >
>  >