On 18 Jun, 2011, at 1:12 , Michael Gardner wrote: > On Jun 17, 2011, at 3:44 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote: > >> Java methods aren't even first-class objects (nor, in fact, objects at all) >> in the Java world. Clojure can hardly do better than Java in unifying things >> at the JVM level. The one thing that you can do with a method in Java is >> call it, and the same limitation applies in Clojure. > > Why would it have to be done at the JVM level? Couldn't the Clojure compiler > generate an anonymous function whenever it sees a Java method? I presume it > currently doesn't do this for performance reasons.
How would it "see" a Java method in the first place? It's not a value, so Clojure would have to add a special language rule for making sense of it: "a symbol that does not refer to a var but that does name an existing Java method is replaced by an anonymous function calling that Java method". I doubt the benefit (syntactic sugar) would justify the added complexity. The explicit creation of the anonymous function by the programmer also takes care of the arity problem; an automatically generated one would have to cover all possible arities. Konrad. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
