Another approach to lambdas

[Arved Sandstrom]

http://www.infoq.com/news/2013/07/el3

 

[Jan Burse]

http://www.infoq.com/news/2013/07/el3

 

[Sebastian]

Am 17.07.2013 04:02, schrieb Arved Sandstrom:

http://www.infoq.com/news/2013/07/el3

I like the EL syntax: ((x,y) -> x+y)(4, 5)

This reads like a real functional expression, no clutter with ".apply()"
etc. A pity this wasn't possible in Java.

-- Sebastian

 

[Robert Klemme]

Am 17.07.2013 04:02, schrieb Arved Sandstrom:

I like the EL syntax: ((x,y) -> x+y)(4, 5)

This reads like a real functional expression, no clutter with ".apply()"
etc. A pity this wasn't possible in Java.

It will be soon.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~briangoetz/lambda/lambda-state-4.html

Cheers

robert

 

[Sebastian]

Am 18.07.2013 07:36, schrieb Robert Klemme:

It will be soon.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~briangoetz/lambda/lambda-state-4.html

Cheers

robert

Yes. I specifically meant the syntax. Java 8 lambda syntax is reasonably
OK, but I wish they would have entirely dispensed with the need to
explicitly refer to the single method in a functional interface.

Compare
sumList.apply(map(x -> sumList.apply(x), matrix)); (*)
to
sumList(map(x -> sumList(x), matrix)); (**)
where
sumList is something like
Function<List<Integer>, Integer> sumList = x -> foldr((a,b)->a+b, 0, x);

(*) is actual Java 8 syntax, but I wish it were (**). I even guess that
would have been possible with a bit of compiler magic.

-- Sebastian