----- Mail original -----
> De: "Maurizio Cimadamore" <maurizio.cimadam...@oracle.com>
> À: "Alex Buckley" <alex.buck...@oracle.com>, "amber-spec-experts"
> <amber-spec-experts@openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Jeudi 20 Septembre 2018 22:28:42
> Objet: Re: JEP draft: Concise Method Bodies - extend this to local functions?
> On 20/09/18 21:22, Alex Buckley wrote:
>> On 9/20/2018 1:08 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>>> On 20/09/18 17:32, Remi Forax wrote:
>>>> There is also a potential confusion between
>>>> Function<A,B> fun() = Utils::bar;
>>>> and
>>>> Function<A,B> fun() -> Utils::bar;
>>>>
>>> You meant between
>>>
>>> Function<A,B> fun() = Utils::bar;
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> Function<A,B> fun = Utils::bar;
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> (first is method body, second is variable initializer)
>>
>> I think Remi is noting the fact that, when using `->`, the single
>> expression can be a method reference expression. I have already
>> recorded this situation near the end of the JEP.
yes, but in your example the return type is not the same, i prefer mine
class Utils {
Function<String,String> fun() = this::bar;
Function<String,String> fun2() -> this::bar;
Function<String,String> bar() { return null; }
String bar(String s) { return null; }
}
> Ok - then I added another :-) [not sure we should be worried about it,
> but perhaps worth mentioning in the JEP]
>
Rémi
