"This breaking news, just in: C has objects, and Lisp has static types."
Rather than all the snarky replies, how about you actually explain what makes the Closure-like functionality in Java not really true closures? I can articulate exactly why C doesn't have real objects. You can do OO style programming in pure C, and you design your code as "objects" in the conceptual sense, but you don't have language level support for it. People say "Java doesn't have closures" so frequently that people believe it. But it is really just a common misuse of terminology. What (I think) people mean, when they say that, is that Java doesn't have first class functions (functions as objects) and a concise anonymous functions syntax. But, closures is a feature that Java has always had. I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to get the labels and terminology accurate and clear. -- 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.
