--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
Is there a page with the proposal set out? Have the authors of the
earlier proposals written up anything about this?
--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel...@ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
If an interface declares methods already defined in Object, they don't count either...
For instance, the interface java.util.Comparator has two methods:
int compare(T o1, T o2);
boolean equals(Object obj);
The second method is in there because it has some javadoc on it. Since Object has a method with the same signature, Comparator still qualifies as a SAM.
Roel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
I think it shows it in its worst light, when others show examples it
is OK I guess...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
hhmmm...
wouldn't that be
List<String> userNames = userList.map(#(User u)(
u.getName() // note: round parens, no ";", implicit "return"
));
or
List<String> userNames = userList.map(#(User u){
return u.getName(); // note: "return"
});
But yea, it's not so bad, considering that it's Java.
// Ben
Quite the opposite, I want to promote java-the-platform vs .net, ruby, etc.
Java is a great language if you want compatibility all the way back to 1.0 code, but in terms of having contemporary features and being fun to use it's already lost a great deal of mindshare.
Scala is, frankly, the lowest impact change for java developers willing to move to a better integrated functional syntax (at the cost of legacy functionality)
I *could* promote Java by defending an outdated legacy syntax that must be kept for reasons of backward-compatibility. I could also promote Star Trek by shouting down anyone who says that Kirk's character is over-acted. But to me, the true essence of Star Trek is perhaps better captured with Patrick Stewart at the helm...
And so it is with Java vs Scala, we may mourn the loss of mini-skirts from time to time (who doesn't?). Nevertheless, the end product is arguably better, and you have to admit that holo-decks are pretty cool - there are many stories that just wouldn't have been written without them (a bit like built-in FP then).
So did Star Trek NG denigrate the original series? I'd like to think not - it's full of nostalgia for me. I'd also like to think that Scala isn't denigrating Java, it's just the future of the same universe.
As for Scala mailing lists? Yes, I'm a frequent contributor there, where they boldly go to some amazing new places at times. The best part is that we manage to do so without the dilithium crystals failing every third episode, and I'm finding that I really don't miss it as a plot element all that much.
On 1 Jun 2010 12:32, "Reinier Zwitserloot" <rein...@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh, yeah, we'll just move every single existing java programmer over.
Easy peasy.
I get really annoyed at people who have this 'oh, give up java
already' vibe. If you don't care, that's fine. Why don't you go and be
positive on the scala mailing list, instead of being negative here?
Some of us are trying to make java a better language. If you'd rather
torch java's future to increase scala adoption, I don't want to talk
to you. The more languages the merrier, let them win on their merits,
not by the demerits of other languages. Also, it's all on the JVM.
When one JVM language gains strength, that solidifies the JVM as a
platform, which is good for all JVM languages. I want a strong Scala
*AND* a strong Java.
On Jun 1, 10:56 am, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Syntax wise, we can be a lot s...
> On 1 June 2010 09:35, Moandji Ezana <mwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Michael Neale <michael.ne...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> I think it shows it in its worst light, when others show examples it
> >> is OK I guess...
>
...
> > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>...
> mail/google talk: kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com
> wave: kev.lee.wri...@googlewave.com
> skype: kev.lee.wright
> twitter: @thecoda
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
So basically, this is just syntax sugar around single-method anonymous inner classes.
What really counts though is that we get 1st-class method handles.
the annoying "final limitation"
What really counts though is that we get 1st-class method handles.Agreed. That's pretty awesome. Also, the prospect that the VM might be able to make dynamic languages as fast or nearly as fast as static ones.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
A clarifying comment by Maurizio on lambda-dev claims that they are
currently implementing something that's similar to the straw man
presented by Mark Reinhold at Devoxx '09, with some of the tough
questions in it removed (such as using .() instead of plain parens to
'execute' a closure), so the widespread discussion on lambda-dev can
at least experiment better.
In otherwords, 'making the compiler-writer's job easy' is apparently
part of the plan, at least for now.
A standard function type in the JVM *already exists* in the jdk7
specs; it's called MethodHandle. There are already calls going out
amongst the alternative languages on the JVM crowd to start switching
to it. Also, partly motivated by the closures stuff, MethodHandle
objects will most likely gain a JVM-based 'asSam()' method which means
at least some of the structural typing that other languages offer can
be done 'natively' instead of working by using a lot of reflection
magic. So, Josh, Michael, time to lobby your friendly local
alternative language developer to get on the bandwagon :)
Learning java closure syntax is more complicated than learning scala?
You've got to be kidding me.
"Scala is, frankly, the lowest impact change for java developers willing to move to a better integrated functional syntax (at the cost of legacy functionality)"
Having a functional syntax that is closely integrated into a language (ideally from the point of conception) is a desirable thing. Unfortunately, this deep integration is not possible with Java due to backward-compatibility constraints.For Java developers wanting a syntax that is more natural and effortless than this proposal, it would therefore seem wise to look beyond Java-the-Language. In this broader space of alternate JVM languages the barrier to entry seems lowest for Scala, thanks to static typing and conscious efforts at making Java-Scala interop effortless. Scala can be initially used as though it were no more than a tidied-up variant of Java, allowing developers to become productive again in a very short space of time.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.