RFR - JDK-8203442 String::transform (Code Review)

[Remi Forax]

----- Mail original -----
> De: "Alan Bateman" <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>
> À: "Jim Laskey" <james.laskey at oracle.com>, "core-libs-dev" <core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Vendredi 21 Septembre 2018 12:22:42
> Objet: Re: RFR - JDK-8203442 String::transform (Code Review)

> On 18/09/2018 18:52, Jim Laskey wrote:
>> Please review the code for String::transform. The goal is to provide a String
>> instance method to allow function application of custom transformations applied
>> to an instance of String.
>>
>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlaskey/8203442/webrev/index.html
>> jbs: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203442
>> csr: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203703
> I hate to bring up naming but if I have a Stream<String> or
> Optional<String> then I'll use the "map" method to apply the mapping
> function. Has this already been through the naming bike shed and it
> settled on "transform"? Maybe a different name was chosen after looking
> at code that would use it in stream operations? Maybe "transform" was
> used as the argument to the function is always text? I'm not interested
> in re-opening any discussions, just trying to see if options are
> captured in a mail somewhere.
> 
> I'm also wondering if this is general enough to be defined by
> CharSequence. Retrofitting CharSequence is always problematic and never
> done lightly but I'm just wondering if it has been discussed and
> dismissed. I don't think it could be done at a later time, at least not
> without changing the input type parameter so that the mapping function
> is Function<? super CharSequence, R> rather than Function<String, R>.

the main issue is that a lot of utility methods take a String as parameter, not a CharSequence :(
and Function<? super String, R> is a supertype not a subtype of Function<? super CharSequence, R>.

> 
> -Alan

Rémi