Lambda syntax puzzler

[Brian Goetz]

Eg discussed and rejected.  

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 16, 2013, at 8:31 AM, Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Stuart Marks <stuart.marks at oracle.com> wrote:
>> Either that, or make lambda formal parameters implicitly final. I've always
> 
> That is apparently a good idea with no objections; how come EG isn't
> adopting it? what are the concerns?
> 
>> hated code that mutated its parameters anyway.
>> 
>> s'marks
>> 
>> On 10/12/13 6:50 AM, Samir Talwar wrote:
>>> :-D
>>> 
>>> Now that traditional C-style `for` loops are a thing of the past, I think
>>> we should expunge the increment and decrement operators from the language.
>>> Python had the right idea.
>>> 
>>> — Samir.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I'm sure that people of this list will be able to see the beauty of the
>>>> following code produced by one of my students.
>>>>    IntPredicate p = i -> i --> 0;
>>>> 
>>>> Rémi
>