On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Ricky Clarkson <[email protected]> wrote: > 0? It's already five years since the fully-working BGGA compiler for > lambdas and six years since the proposal.
There are significant technical differences between the feature set of BGGA and the feature set of Lambda. As noted in the JEP for Lambda (http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/126): "Project Lambda started with a straw-man proposal and has gone through several "State of the Lambda" iterations which have evolved both the syntax and feature set of the project. The work on lambda expression portion of Project Lambda is informed by numerous previous efforts, including but not limited to: * BGGA, * CICE * FCM * Pizza [dates back to 1997 and predates the GJ work which was the basis for Java generics -ed.] The feature set of Project Lambda is judged to better address the needs of evolving the Java platform than the earlier proposals. The design of virtual extension methods is likewise informed by a large body of prior work in the programming language community including: * multiple inheritance in C++ * static extension methods in C# * traits in Fortress * traits in Scala * mixins in Strongtalk" There are active discussions about Project Lambda over on its OpenJDK mailing list. >10 years since MS added > delegates to their fork of Java (I don't mean C#, but the one the court case > was about) which are not lambdas but meet some of the same needs. > > I expect tooling support will be there before release, the IDEs had the Java > 7 features ready before it was released. Less maintained tools like jad or > some of the lint tools might not be ready on time though. > > Compare that to Java 5 though, where the IDEs were terrible on generics for > quite a while. I think that was because the process was more closed back > then. I don't like the slow speed of progress but I do appreciate that it's > at least visible from the outside. One reason there was prompt IDE support for Project Coin/JSR 334 features that the Project Coin/JSR 334 team made sure to reach out and work with people from all three major IDEs; more timely IDE support for the new language features than in JDK 5 was an explicitly recognized goal this time around. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "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.
