Everyone loves generics, by and large. The same will be true for closures. *NOT* having closures means folks are jumping through just as many hoops and creating just as complex, if not more complex, code.
The tight schedule on the other hand, that's got me a little concerned. On May 20, 9:35 am, Nick Wiedenbrueck <[email protected]> wrote: > Having a look at the straw-man proposal (http://cr.openjdk.java.net/ > ~mr/lambda/straw-man/) and the spec draft for project lambda (http:// > openjdk.java.net/projects/lambda/) I'm concerned that lambdas in Java > might add up too much complexity to the Java Language. For example > when it comes to subtyping of function types. > > We've had the (at least controversial) experience introducing generics > in Java 5. But while developers mostly use generics from a client side > perspective, which hides much of their complexity, lambdas (or > functions or closures) will be used to a huge part at the client side. > Another indicator is that Java gets closer to Scala, which many people > think is too complex. > > Do you think, these concerns are valid? > > -- > 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 > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- 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.
