Software Engineering Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professionals, academics, and students working within the systems development life cycle. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I often wonder why Java uses :: for method references instead of ., e.g. why write
System.out::println
instead of
System.out.println
Of course, one might simply answer: "because the designers decided so". On the other hand, I would have expected the second syntax because the dot is the usual Java syntax for accessing class members.
So is there any known special reason for introducing the new :: syntax instead of using the existing . convention for method references?
This is to avoid ambiguity in case if class has (static) member with the same name as method (Java allows that).
It is easy to see from code snippet in Java tutorial about method references:
Because this lambda expression invokes an existing method, you can use a method reference instead of a lambda expression:
Arrays.sort(rosterAsArray, Person::compareByAge);
If class Person in above snippet would also have member named compareByAge (of the type appropriate to pass to Arrays.sort), dot notation wouldn't allow to tell whether parameter refers to method or member.
They introduced a new syntax because the behaviour is not the same.
The . means that you want to get a reference on the function in order to invoke it right after.
When you use method reference (::) you want to store a reference on the function but you don't want to invoke it right away.
A more practical aspect is how would you differentiate between a public attribute and a method having the same name with the . ? You simply can't. With :: there is no more ambiguity.
