Hi,
I really do not know why some proposals are restored back from the
grave, without answering for questions that was already made:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8-dev/2011-December/000382.html
2014-03-28 12:37 GMT+01:00 Ulf Zibis <ulf.zi...@cosoco.de>:
>
> Am 28.03.2014 11:05, schrieb Florian Weimer:
>>>
>>> String mySub =
>>> myVeryLongNamedString.substring(.indexOf("C"),.indexOf("Q"));
>>
>>
>> You can already write
>>
>> String mySub = apply(myVeryLongNamedString,
>> (s) -> s.substring(s.indexOf("C"), s.indexOf("Q")))
>>
>> with a helper function like this:
>>
>> public static <T, R> R apply(T value, Function<T, R> func) {
>> return func.apply(value);
>> }
>>
>>
>> You don't even need to repeat the type. But the explicit version isn't
>> too bad, either:
>>
>> String mySub;
>> {
>> String s = myVeryLongNamedString;
>> mySub = s.substring(s.indexOf("C"), s.indexOf("Q"));
>> }
>>
>> So I'm not sure if leading dot expressions are all that helpful.
>
>
> Hm, nice hacks, but don't you notice the difference in readability and total
> amount of code lines in comparison to my proposed one-liner?
> IMHO the more lines/characters a code has, the more effort is needed to (1)
> read it and (2) understand it's sense.
>
> BTW, our 2nd example wouldn't work as expression in for loop arguments.
>
> But what for do we discuss the "leading dot expressions" such exhaustive, if
> there still is no conviction to add the simple "chaining syntax" to the Java
> language at all?
>
> -Ulf
>
--
Pozdrawiam
Marek Kozieł ( Lasu )
http://na-chlodno.blogspot.com/
http://lasu2string.blogspot.com/
