Updated State of the Lambda

[Brian Goetz]

More the latter.  Some of the ancillary benefits include: removing identity opens up opportunities for VM optimization; nailing down the type of 'this' greatly simplifies type inference.  And lambdas that need to refer to themselves are, in practice, a corner case.  It is a shame that we created an inconsistency (lambdas behave differently from inner classes) but in the end we felt the new semantics were so far preferable that it was worth doing something different.  

On Oct 18, 2010, at 1:04 AM, Peter Levart wrote:

> This is good news. In particular the 1st notable change below. This is a move in the right direction. I wonder if the reason for the cahnge was a result of desire to keep the door open for possible future extension to support "transparent" lambda or just of realization that lexical scoping has a better solution:problem ratio than annonymous inner classes style of scoping? In either case I think we are getting better lambda this way.
> I can also understand that the benefit of "yield" was not worth the additional confusion it might cause, although replacing it for "return" it is a step away from transparent lambda.
> 
> Regards, Peter
> 
> 
> On 10/15/10, Brian Goetz wrote:
>> An updated draft (Version 3) of the State of the Lambda has been published at:
>> 
>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~briangoetz/lambda/lambda-state-3.html
>> 
>> Notable differences from the previous draft include:
>>  - 'this' in lambda expressions is lexically scoped
>>  - 'yield' keyword dropped in favor of 'return'
>>  - new syntax
>> 
>> Maurizio will be pushing an implementation conforming to this draft soon.
>> 
>> 
>>