Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

would you care to explain why this is not enough? You can pass them around, invoke them, get their properties.

The interface may be bad but I'm not sure what is missing.



In the original comment, I was merely addressing the misunderstanding of the GP regarding the reflection packages constructs.

The interface is your basic (irreducible) disconnected/unbound procedure invocation API, with all the positive/warts associated. I agree that in principle, we have enough information in the reflection data structure to allow a (specific) JVM implementation to provide a non-standard 'method object' feature. Consensus, possibly? (Good question, really. C. Nutter is one to hit with that one.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: