heads-up: biggie overload rewrite

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

On 25/07/13 23:13, Richard Warburton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >From a language perspective, the problem is simple: we can't type check
>> 's.length()' until we know that 's' is a String, and we can't figure that
>> out until we look at the assignment target, and we can't do that until
>> overload resolution is done.  In other words, there is not a
>> context-independent way to figure out that
>> 'Comparator.comparing(s->s.length())' is best treated as an invocation of
>>   'comparing(ToIntFunction)'.
>>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but at least this means that developers should be
> able to provide sufficient information for the compiler to correctly infer
> the lambda expression's type by writing:
>
> Comparator.comparing((String s) -> s.length())
Correct - that's indeed the preferred approach. Note that this doesn't 
work merely because of a bug, which I will fix soon.

Maurizio
>
> rather than
>
> Comparator.comparing((ToIntFunction<String>)(s -> s.length()))
>
> I suspect that providing argument types is a lot less of a leap for a
> developer to make when fixing a compile error than providing a full
> functional interface type.
>
> regards,
>
>    Dr. Richard Warburton
>
>    http://insightfullogic.com
>    @RichardWarburto <http://twitter.com/richardwarburto>
>