[jvm-l] invokedynamic: Is It What We Really Need?

Here are my thoughts on invokedynamic proposal. http://groovyland.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/invokedynamic-is-it-what-we-really-need/ Alex --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups JVM Languages group. To post

[jvm-l] Re: invokedynamic: Is It What We Really Need?

On 5/9/08, Alex Tkachman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here are my thoughts on invokedynamic proposal. http://groovyland.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/invokedynamic-is-it-what-we-really-need/ I think it's unfortunate that the JSR was started with a solution (invokedynamic) rather than a problem

[jvm-l] Re: invokedynamic: Is It What We Really Need?

I have a lot of sympathy for the position that you outline in your blog post but I would like to wait for the EDR to be published before coming to a settled view on the matter. The devil is in the details and I have not seem all the details yet. I am totally agree. At the end of the day

[jvm-l] Re: invokedynamic: Is It What We Really Need?

Alex Tkachman wrote: I have a lot of sympathy for the position that you outline in your blog post but I would like to wait for the EDR to be published before coming to a settled view on the matter. The devil is in the details and I have not seem all the details yet. I am totally agree. At