neal at gafter.com
Mon Aug 15 15:00:38 PDT 2011
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
> Remi has it right here. You can say "all these languages let you do X
> with closures", but all of those idioms have their roots in a 1950s
> programming model where parallelism was science fiction. Yes, it took
> Java a while to get closures, but adopting a 1950s-era view of closures
> just because we're still catching up is "not the modernization you are
> looking for."
In that case can you please remove from the "lambda functions and utils" all
of those API elements that appear to be inherently sequential (e.g.
Blocks.chain, Blocks.repeat, Blocks.repeatWhile, Blocks.repeatUntil, etc)
and those that are specified to be sequential (Predicates.and,
Predicates.or, etc)? The inclusion of such facilities is at odds with your
More information about the lambda-dev