Latest Thinking

[Rémi Forax]

Le 22/06/2010 12:48, Howard Lovatt a écrit :
> A couple of comments on the current MethodHandle API:
>
> 1. Having only one bootstrap method for InvokeDynamic is a bit
> limiting, it it possible to have one per use site?
>    

It's an open issue, we're working on it.

> 2. Has thought been given to using the .( args ) notation (or what
> ever it ends up as) from lambda dev for invokeGeneric( args )?
>    

My opinion is that the lambda spec has to mature a little bit
before looking at this kind of things.
Currently, the lambda super type is not MethodHandle but Object

> 3. Are there plans to add MethodHandle literals, e.g. Class#method( types )?
>    

The mlvm workspace already contains method handle literals :)

> 4. Assuming 3 above; are there plans for a binding literal, e.g.
> MethodHandle addA = String#concat( String, "A" )?
>
>    

As far as I know, No.
I don't think it worth the introduction of a new syntax

MethodHandle addA = insertArguments(String#concat( String, String ), 1, "A");


Morever, your proposed syntax has a bad property.
It allow type and expression to occur at the same place.

> I am sure these items have been already discussed in the expert group,
> just wondering what the latest thinking is.
>
>    -- Howard.
>    

cheers,
Rémi