I'm with you on that one; are we sure this won't be yet another halfhearted solution (hack)? It's hard to follow, scope seems to suddenly mutate at the discretion of the few in charge at Oracle.
On Sep 8, 10:07 pm, Serge Boulay <[email protected]> wrote: > why do you think we are getting the "real lambda's" with this delay? Did the > scope of the lambda project change with the delay? > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Maciej Hrynczyszyn < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > 2010/9/8 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]>: > > > > From Mark's post: > > > > Plan A: JDK 7 (as currently defined) Mid 2012 > > > Plan B: JDK 7 (minus Lambda, Jigsaw, and part of Coin) Mid 2011 > > > JDK 8 (Lambda, Jigsaw, the rest of Coin, ++) Late 2012 > > > > To me, "JDK 7 minus Lambda, Jigsaw and part of Coin" doesn't sound much > > like > > > "Getting Java moving again". > > > Getting the real lambda is probably worth the delay. > > > M, > > > -- > > 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]<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > .com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://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.
