RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories

[Rémi Forax]

You can have 255 parameters for a method, it's perhaps a little too much, isn't it ?

cheers,
Rémi


Le 14 octobre 2015 12:40:15 CEST, Timo Kinnunen <timo.kinnunen at gmail.com> a écrit :
>Hi, 
>
>Alternatively you could create the variants whose parameters can be
>passed utilizing "all available registers",  whatever that means in
>Java context. The rationale is that the reason for preferring variables
>over varargs is performance and this way there is no performance left
>on the table.
>
>
>
>Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
>
>
>From: Paul Sandoz
>Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 11:38
>Cc: core-libs-dev
>Subject: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection
>Factories
>
>
>
>> On 14 Oct 2015, at 06:18, Stuart Marks <stuart.marks at oracle.com>
>wrote:
>> I'm not entirely sure what to take from this. If it were clearly
>exponential, we could say with confidence that above a certain
>threshold there would be vanishingly little benefit adding more
>arguments. But since the curve seems to flatten out, maybe this is
>pushing us to add more pairs than we had originally thought. The
>current draft API has 8 pairs; that seems to leave a few percent of
>cases on the table. Obviously we can't get to 100%, but is 97% good
>enough?
>> 
>
>11 if only for amusement purposes :-)
>
>Capturing 9 out of 10 cases seems reasonable to me i.e. 5 entries.
>
>Perhaps a common case for r > 5 entries is a map for the primitive
>types and ref (ignoring “void”), which would push the limit up to 9
>entries. I took a quick browse through the JDK and it is not that
>common AFAICT. j.l.invoke tends to use enums for example. There are two
>cases in java.ObjectInputStream and sun.misc.ProxyGenerator.
>
>Paul.