Is it too soon to remain *absolutely silent* about comprehensions, pattern
matching, and pretty much any proposal that John Rose has ever come up with?


On 4 June 2013 22:32, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote:

> Okay everyone, nobody talk about Jigsaw, starting now.
>
>
>
> --
> Cédric
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Ricky Clarkson 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Well, lambdas started getting added after everyone gave up asking too. :)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:47 PM, clay <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Wow! Nice!
>>>
>>> I'm surprised it got added so quietly after such extensive debate, and
>>> months after everyone gave up asking. I'm definitely not complaining.
>>>
>>> Yes, a JDK8 standard equivalent to guava fromNullable or fj fromNull
>>> would be nice as well. I can live with what they have though.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, May 30, 2013 2:52:20 AM UTC-5, Morten A-Gott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> With a the other day, Java 8's Optional is starting to look more
>>>> useful. It finally got filter, map and flatMap:
>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/**lambda/lambda/jdk/rev/**fde3666e6394<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/rev/fde3666e6394>
>>>>
>>>> Then, ifPresent was renamed to forEach:
>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/**lambda/lambda/jdk/rev/**9d9753590439<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/rev/9d9753590439>
>>>>
>>>> Now, if we could get an factory method that will handle instansiation
>>>> with nulls, (like a fromNullable in guava, or the apply in Option in
>>>> Scala) creating Optionals would be a lot less verbose. No reason why
>>>> every developer should have to write a null check before creating an
>>>> Optional.
>>>>
>>>> And while they are at it, why not add 'exists' and 'forall' ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Java Posse" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>  --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Java Posse" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Java Posse" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>



-- 
Kevin Wright
mail: [email protected]
gtalk / msn : [email protected]
quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright
google+: http://gplus.to/thecoda
<[email protected]>
twitter: @thecoda
vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright
steam: kev_lee_wright

"My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not
regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current
conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side
of the ledger" ~ Dijkstra

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java 
Posse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to