On 09/24/2013 01:30 PM, Kristopher wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Terence Copestake <
[email protected]> wrote:
Playing devil's advocate here, could this feature make the language more
expressive?
Take for example an API where you'd typically wrap a method call in
try/catch blocks to handle the various "outcomes" e.g. a user login, you'd
maybe have a UserDisabled exception, a UserAlreadyLoggedIn exception, a
UserPasswordIncorrect exception, etc.
With the addition of this syntactic sugar, the method could instead accept
an anonymous class with a onDisabled, onLoggedIn, onPasswordIncorrect
methods.
Perhaps it would also have a performance benefit over cascading through
catch blocks? Though someone else would have to confirm that.
Why wouldn't you want this to a concrete, real class? I don't see the
benefit, in your example, of doing an anonymous class vs defining an actual
class and passing that in as the handler.