From: Pedro Arnal Puente Date: 2005-09-07T05:58:05+09:00 Subject: Re: ruby style blocks in java Hi everybody On 06/09/05, bonefry wrote: > Those code blocks are really nice :-) Very nice indeed... 8-) > But anyway, they are usefull not because they are elegant, but because > they capture the context in which they are created. In Java only > variables declared will be captured by an annonymous class, so > if you want some variable in the current context, you can do something > like this: I pay the bills working as architect (but with plenty coding and field work) in a java shop. Thinking in blocks and closures really helps to avoid repeating collections traversals and analisys ad-nauseam. Closures as anonymous or inner classes keep the code simpler, making clearer what are you doing, not how. It makes also easier the reuse of common blocks as full classes. We usually use jakarta commons [1]. It provides the basic interfaces for typical functors (closure, predicate and transformer) and collection traversal and processing functions. Not the ideal package, but enough for our needs (and zero time provided to implement or evaluate alternatives 8'( ). The concept is very easy to sell to upper echelons and to developers (it pays fast). The only real price is more verbosity compared with Ruby. Final variables are not a problem, as we try to make final everything that musn't be non-final. 8-) > Groovy looks good, and it is (much) faster that Ruby (from my own > personal experience) but it is still too young, and although it's a > JSR, it's programmers only work on their free time on it, so we will > have to wait, and to be honest, right now the future does not look very > bright for Groovy (it's only my oppinion, and I hope I'm wrong). I would like to have the time for a beanshell vs. groovy comparation... [1] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/collections/ Just my two cents. -- Saludos mercenarios... A los vampiros no les gusta el sol y yo, como es normal, no soy una excepci�n. Lleg� el verano, lleg� el verano...