updated syntax for method references
sven at efftinge.de
Fri Mar 2 06:16:42 PST 2012
It doesn't say anything about member literals, does it?
I meant something along the lines of the class literal where you'd get the java.lang.reflect instance.
would be a statically typed version of
On Mar 2, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> On 03/02/2012 01:54 PM, Sven Efftinge wrote:
>> could you elaborate on what ideas you have for the '#' syntax?
>> Something like member literals?
> see section 8,
>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 12:05 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>>> I recently pushed a changeset to remove support for '#'-based syntax for
>>> _method references_ (the commit message is confusing, I pushed too fast
>>> ;-)). This means that the long standing syntax for method references:
>>> new Foo()#bar
>>> is now not supported anymore. Instead, the compiler accepts a similar
>>> infix variant, where '#' is replaced by '::' - this has been available
>>> for quite some time, and it is also the syntax used in all recent
>>> new Foo()::bar
>>> The syntax discussion regarding method references is still ongoing with
>>> the EG - so this push doesn't mean we are 100% committed to the '::'
>>> syntax - on the other hand we are fully committed _not to_ have the '#'
>>> syntax, as we envisage better usages for such token in future releases.
More information about the lambda-dev