Review Request: CR#8001634 : Initial set of lambda functional interfaces

[Brian Goetz]

For all you Procedure-lovers out there -- how do you feel about the specialized types

  IntProcedure
  LongProcedure
etc?

I think they're awful.  But, this naming rule serves us pretty well in all the other cases.  

Is there something that isn't Block and isn't Procedure that everyone can get behind?  

On Nov 4, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Remi Forax wrote:

> On 11/04/2012 11:29 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 4/11/2012 6:04 AM, Brian Goetz wrote:
>>> Ok, everyone seems ok with procedure, but how much do we actually *dislike* block?   (I think this one is an "ain't broke, don't fix") case, and personally I find procedure buth clunky and more limiting than block (just as factory is more limiting than supplier.).
>>> 
>>> (Respond only if you *hate* block.)
>> 
>> I find Block devoid of useful information (similar to thunk) it's just a name for a chunk of code. Procedure.apply works better for me. Procedure.apply also (to me) naturally takes arguments and returns nothing.
> 
> I prefer Proc to Procedure and Fun to Function.
> Those functional interfaces will be used frequently like List, Deque or Map are used now, and as you can see the collection framework tends to use short conceptual names, I think we should keep this convention.
> 
>> 
>> David
> 
> Rémi
>