closures after all?
forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Nov 18 13:08:36 PST 2009
The simplified closure proposal (lambda) is here:
Le 18/11/2009 21:18, Howard Lovatt a écrit :
> Hopefully this is true and we will get something more ambitious than the
> current proposals. I think a limited form of closures, at the CISE end of
> the spectrum, i.e. short syntax for inner classes, would be a good edition
> along with an expanded collections library that includes internal iterators
> that make good use these new short-syntax inner classes. It would be
> important to design the addition so that it could latter be expanded if
> experience showed there was a need at a later date, e.g. possible future
> expansion could include: non-local returns, write to captured variables,
> structural typing, control loops, etc.
> -- Howard. (is the news too good to be true?)
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Serge Boulay<serge.boulay at gmail.com>
>> To: coin-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:47:42 -0500
>> Subject: closures after all?
>> Maybe reading into this too much, but are closures in pipe after all?
More information about the coin-dev