Playing with new compiler

[Ali Ebrahimi]

Hi Maurizio,
Is not this ambiguous?

call(#{ x -> System.out.println(x);  return null; }); //prints
"SAM1" ?????

Candidates:  SAM<R,A>, SAM1

   static interface SAM1 {
        String m1(Integer n);
   }

    static interface SAM<R,A> {
        R m(A n);
   }


Best Regards,
Ali Ebrahimi

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore <
maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi Ali,
> the following looks problematic [the lambda expression is void compatible,
> so it should not be possible to convert it to a SAM descriptor returning
> String. The rest looks good to me (including the message that says 'cyclic
> inference'). We are discussing as to whether, in cases of cyclic inference,
> inference variables should be instantiated eagerly or not (i.e. to Object)
> so that method applicability check can continue. For now, the compiler is
> conservative, and does not attempt to attribute a lambda body until the type
> of the lambda parameters are fully known/inferred.
>
> Maurizio
>
>
> On 25/05/11 08:21, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
>
>> call(#{ x ->  System.out.println(x);});    /* compile :
>> reference to call is ambiguous, both method call(SAM1) in AMBTest and
>> method call(SAM2) in AMBTest match
>>
>
>