why no function types?

Neal Gafter neal at gafter.com
Thu Mar 8 10:26:12 PST 2012

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

> by example,
>  Runnable[] array = { () -> { foo(); } };
> is Ok (overdose of parenthesis aside).

Wouldn't that translate into a non-generic function type under the covers,
since there are no parameter or return types?  In which case you could do
that with function types as well?

More information about the lambda-dev mailing list