Method calls vs lambda calls

[Mikael Grev]

Isn't this comparable to the problem of hiding a field with a local? I mean complexity wise. And I think the times you happen to use the same local name as a field is a lot more common.

If so I think that it will be enough that the IDEs are color coding them.

Disallow overloaded names is unfortunately not an option since adding new methods would then break code more frequently.

Cheers,
Mikael


On 15 dec 2009, at 08.04, Joshua Bloch wrote:

> I think that perhaps some explicit syntax should be required when invoking a
> function object.  That would prevent this sort of confusion.
> 
>         Josh
> 
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Stefan Schulz <schulz at the-loom.de> wrote:
> 
>> You're right, of course.
>> Same as with instance and local variables.
>> 
>> Am 14.12.2009 21:37, schrieb Neal Gafter:
>>> I'd expect the latter to shadow the former (it is in a nested scope, not
>>> the same scope).
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Stefan Schulz <schulz at the-loom.de
>>> <mailto:schulz at the-loom.de>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>    Am 14.12.2009 21:07, schrieb Alex Blewitt:
>>>> public class Example {
>>>>    public int fortyTwo() {
>>>>      return 6*9;
>>>>    }
>>>>    public void run() {
>>>>      System.out.println(fortyTwo())
>>>>      #int() fortyTwo = #int() { return 42; }
>>>>      System.out.println(fortyTwo())
>>>>    }
>>>> }
>>>> 
>>>> What's the result on the output here?
>>> 
>>>    I'd suspect a compile error due to defining two "methods" having the
>>>    same signature in the same scope.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>