Lambda behaving differently than anonymous inner class

[Remi Forax]

On 03/26/2014 05:56 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
> Thanks for the report.  The bug is filed here:
>
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038420
>
> —Dan

Yes, definitively a bug !

Victor, modify a parameter inside a lambda is something weird|.||
   Supplier<Integer>s2 =t ->t++;|
means
|  Supplier<Integer>s2 =t ->{
t = t + 1;
     return t;
   };
|so this is equivalent to|
   Supplier<Integer>s2 =t ->t+ 1;|

cheers,
Rémi

>
> On Mar 26, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Victor Antunes <victor.antunes.ignacio at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> This e-mail is a follow-up to a question I've posted on StackOverflow:
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22648079/lambda-behaving-differently-than-anonymous-inner-class
>>
>>
>> I'm relatively new to Java, and decided to pick up on lambda since the past
>> few days. So I wrote a very simple anonymous inner class and wrote an
>> equivalent lambda.
>>
>> However, the lambda output was different, and it very strongly appears to
>> be a bug.
>>
>> Given:
>>
>> interface Supplier<T> {
>>
>>     T get(T t);}
>>
>> Supplier<Integer> s1 = new Supplier<Integer>() {
>>     @Override
>>     public Integer get(Integer t) {
>>         return t++;
>>     }};Supplier<Integer> s2 = t ->
>> t++;System.out.println(s1.get(2));System.out.println(s2.get(2));
>>
>> The output is 2 and 3, NOT 2 and 2, as one would expect.
>>
>> More info, including discussion about bytecode is available at the SO link
>> above.
>>
>> I'm also new to this list, so apologies if I've broken any mailing list
>> etiquette.
>>
>> -- 
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Victor Antunes
>>
>