The meaning of the word "closure" is perfectly well understood within the java community. Syntax for portable code blocks. No more no less. I've also caught the dictionary thumpers in outright fabrications before, for example the notion that the final variables only restriction somehow means project lambda's proposal isn't a closure proposal. That's just wrong. *ALL* variables are closed over, but accessing some variables may cause a compiler error. The compiler still knows which variable you're talking about. Saying this means it's not the dictionary definition of closure is akin to suggesting the inability to extend final classes somehow means java isn't OO.
On Jun 7, 8:32 pm, Russel Winder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 10:56 -0700, Reinier Zwitserloot wrote: > > [ . . . ] > > > The exact meaning of the word "closure" is of course hotly debated, > > not properly defined, and especially in regards to working with some > > obvious and logical constraints that must be adhered to if closures > > are to be added to java, really a rather nebulous concept. I don't > > really care how much you keep beating this drum of "My meaning is the > > only right one and the rest of y'all are engaging in something I find > > patently absurd" - it's you who is holding absurd notions here. How > > to add closures to java is not a no-brainer. The meaning of the term > > "closure" is like most other tech terms bastardized. Welcome to the > > world. Our languages are living, mutating entities. I suggest you > > learn to deal with it instead of go off on a rant every time. > > The definition may be hotly debated in some circles (almost exclusively > Groovy and Python ones), but in most places the definition is well > understood and indeed well defined. From some dictionary or other: > > . . . a closure is a data structure that holds an expression and > an environment of variable bindings in which that expression is > to be evaluated. > > see also Simon L Peyton Jones, "The Implementation of Functional > Languages", Prentice-Hall, p.378, where different words are used but the > meaning is the same. > > Language is indeed a living and mutating entity, but it much better not > to run headlong into "Humpty Dumpty Syndrome" > > `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful > tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more > nor less.' > > In fact the meaning of a word is a social construct. Jargon is slightly > different in that there needs to be a common definition in order for the > term to be at all useful. There is currently a definition of closure > which works very well for almost all of the world of programming and > computing (except Groovy), let's stick to it. > > -- > Russel. > =========================================================================== == > Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] > 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] > London SW11 1EN, UK w:www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder > > signature.asc > < 1KViewDownload -- 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.
