Sheesh, I can't type. I was referring to the early days of Swing. When the all of the anonymous listener classes killed your GUI start- up time due to all of the class loading.
On Nov 20, 2:07 pm, Bill Robertson <billrobertso...@gmail.com> wrote: > IIRC, I saw something about a silently generated interface as part of > the implementation the closure. Is this correct? Am I the only one > who remember some of the bad early days when oodles of tiny classes > killed your startup time? > > Weren't method handles just approved for JDK 7? If so then why go > with the clunk of an interface? > > Or am I completely off base? > > On Nov 20, 1:49 pm, gafter <neal.gaf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Nov 19, 9:00 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <reini...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Neal wrote that > > > changed spec AFTER the presentation, and AFTER that BOF session. It's > > > basically BGGA with non-local control transfer taken out. It could > > > form a basis for further discussion, but that is about as far removed > > > from an official seal of approval as any other proposal. > > > Correction: I wrote this spec about two weeks ago, before the > > conference began, as part of a discussion with Gosling on a compromise > > spec. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=.
