----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Goetz" <[email protected]>
> To: "Remi Forax" <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Jim Laskey" <[email protected]>, "amber-spec-experts"
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Vendredi 29 Octobre 2021 20:26:28
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Are templated string embedded expressions
> "method parameters" or "lambdas"?
>> Do we really need to support the second case at all ?
>
> Yes :)
>
>> Instead of
>> "Hello \{name()}"
>>
>> it can be written to something like
>> () -> F."Hello \{name()}"
>
> That deprives your callee of the opportunity to choose the formatter for
> you. Whoops, now the feature is way less expressive. One of the goals
> here is to enable APIs to accept TSs as parameters, and be in control of
> the when and how of formatting.
If you want the API to choose the formatter, you can take it as parameter like
a normal lambda
formatter -> formatter."Hello \{name()}"
You do not need to provide an access to a TemplateString explicitly in the
language because you can have a TemplatePolicy identity that returns the one
taken as argument.
>
>>
>> I think the choice between eager and lazy should be reflected in the syntax,
>
> Oh great, two subtly different sets of semantics. Way to overspend the
> complexity budget.
I don't understand, those expressions, lambdas and method references already
exist in Java.
Rémi
