A syntax option (function types versus arrays)
jjb at google.com
Mon Mar 1 15:55:24 PST 2010
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Neal Gafter <neal at gafter.com> wrote:
> By comparison to the infix notation the other forms look clumsy.
This issue is controversial. There are those who find the "infix" (arrow)
notation particularly ugly in the context of Java.
> It doesn't make sense to
> cripple the function type syntax to support something that is and
> always will be unsafe.
This language ("cripple the function type syntax") seems far too strong. I
think what you're saying is more like "I like the arrow notation better."
Safe or not, I think it's highly desirable that we be able to express the
type that represents an array of function types. Otherwise function types
will be second-class citizens: you can (to the best of my knowledge) express
arrays of every other Java type. This is not the sort of invariant to give
More information about the lambda-dev