3 ms·
> For that kind of lowest-common-denominator development JDK8 has nothing that JDK6 doesn't I see you are also one of the folks who ignores try-with-resources.
by mdaniel 3y ago
> For that kind of lowest-common-denominator development JDK8 has nothing that JDK6 doesn't
I see you are also one of the folks who ignores try-with-resources. And, say what you will about lambdas, it is night and day different between pre-8 and post-8 implementations of those various one-method interfaces such as InvocationHandler
Connection fakeConn = (Connection)Proxy.newInstance(cl, new Class[]{Connection.class}, (proxy, method, args) -> { /*something awesome*/ })
- lmm 3y agoI like both those things but they're just syntax sugar, they increase expressiveness at the cost of a more complex language. If the goal was a dumb language for dumb offshore developers (I don't think it is, but that's what the post I was responding to was saying), JDK6 is an even better choice than JDK8. Putting it another way, the changes going 6 -> 8 are the same kind of things as the changes going 9 -> 10, or even 9 -> 17.