Expected distribution of lambda sizes (Re: Syntax poll, take 2)

[Reinier Zwitserloot]

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Neal Gafter <neal at gafter.com> wrote:

> Alex's comment makes sense to me: we cannot reasonably expect to glean the
> expected size of lambda bodies from an analysis of existing code bases that
> both lack lambda expressions and lack APIs that were designed in the
> presence of a language containing lambda expressions.
>
>
That's exactly what I said earlier. Not that it's particularly relevant
here; regardless of the size of the body of a for, if, or while statement, a
large chunk of the java community puts that body in a block. I'll go out on
a limb and claim that this has some relevance to how a large chunk of the
java community ends up writing their closure literals.

Seems obvious enough that I did not expect I'd have to defend it against
silly comments such as what Alex Blewitt wrote, but, there you have it.


>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot <
> reinier at zwitserloot.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt at gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > On 16 Jun 2011, at 08:03, Reinier Zwitserloot <reinier at zwitserloot.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Using the apparent aggregate preferences of the greater java
>> community,
>> > as
>> > > gleaned by looking at a lot of open source code, I conclude that the
>> > greater
>> > > java community will likely end up putting a lot more linebreaks in
>> > closure
>> > > bodies than we are doing with these examples.
>> >
>> > Using this logic, we can conclude that no-one in the greater Java
>> community
>> > will be interested in lambdas, since looking at open source code shows
>> no
>> > sign of lambda use at the moment.
>> >
>> >
>> This flippant commentary makes no sense and does absolutely nothing to
>> further the discussion.
>>
>>
>