Name of lambda parameters

[Remi Forax]

On 01/08/2013 05:53 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
> Also, this doesn't really "complete" anything. 

JDK8 allows to do reflection on method parameters but not on lambda 
parameters,
looks like a hole in the spec.

> All it does is kick the "why can't we" questions down the road -- "why 
> can't we annotate lambdas, we can annotate methods?"

"why lambdas we already have inner classes" ...

And I don't propose to annotate lambda parameters. They should be 
annotated even if there is no way have the annotation at runtime. 
Otherwise, most all type checkers of JSR 308 that relies on the fact 
that you always can annotate the variable/parameter definitions will break.

> (And, if we try to "complete" that, it will be "why are lambda 
> expressions special, and not all expressions?")  This creates more 
> incompleteness than it addresses.

because there is two parts in a lambda, the external part is an 
expression and should not be annotatable,
the internal part is an anonymous function and like any other way to 
declare parameters in Java, should be annotatable.

Rémi

>
> On 1/8/2013 11:43 AM, Tim Peierls wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr
>> <mailto:forax at univ-mlv.fr>> wrote:
>>
>>     We should have a way to get lambda parameter names and parameter
>>     annotations at least just for completeness.
>>
>>
>> I disagree. "Just for completeness" is not compelling.
>>
>> --tim