Given that Mark has targeted JDK7 for early 2010, your estimate for JDK8 is almost certainly a year too early at least.
I am sad that "closures" have come to be seen as some kind of panacea, where people think having them gives Java a bright and secure future while not having them gives Java a quick and certain death. If we did the full BGGA proposal tomorrow, people would quickly determine that properties, or reified higher-kinded generics, or traits, or multimethods, or pattern matching, or keyword methods, or operator overloading, or data binding, or any number of features drawn from other languages must be shoe-horned into Java too, or else it will die. But one language cannot be an amalgam of every other language, especially when Java's vast base of existing libraries and fondness for migration compatibility are taken into account. Alex On Feb 23, 7:36 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I don't have proof that closures are 'definitely' coming in > java8, but I have heard no statement from anyone in any sort of > official capacity that closures are over. Just that java 7 already has > more than its fair share of language changes as is, and closures are > too big (and there's too much arguing between the various proposals). > It also seems, from admittedly not statistically reliable information > (asking people at java conferences about java doesn't really give you > a view of the average joe's opinions), that there are significantly > more people in favour of some sort of closure proposal vs. not, so if > the stalemate can be resolved, which is perhaps somewhat more likely > with the 'shock' that closures still won't be in java until at least > 2011 or so as a best case scenario (guesstimating java 8's release) > that the stand-offish nature of the current closure situation will > diminish somewhat. > > In other words, I have hope, that's all. > > On Feb 23, 11:58 pm, Alex Buckley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Feb 21, 8:25 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > So, given that closures are likely coming in java8, wouldn't it be > > > nice to add the relatively low-impact extension method system right > > > now? > > > What evidence do you have for your statement about closures? Moreover, > > where can I read about your proposal for extension methods? > > > Alex --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
