Java holds backwards compatibility as sacrosanct, and its current designers know this. Therefore, they don't add features unless its clearly the best possible answer given existing constraints. As you just said, you're not entirely happy with this. It therefore wouldn't fit well in java.
That link (to tomasp.net) is down so I can't review the change, but this sounds like an issue where closures solve everything. Closures are coming, why add a stopgap measure that cannot be removed? On Nov 9, 1:11 am, RogerV <[email protected]> wrote: > Yet another language evolution area where Microsoft's C#/VB languages > for .NET are racing on ahead to provide a solution within the language > itself. While Java, in the meantime, hasn't even managed to catch up > with them on the closures/lambdas feature. > > new await and async keywords > > Asynchronous Programming for C# and Visual > Basichttp://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/async.aspx > > I still like the Go language approach to async programming better, > though, than this. -- 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.
