Request for Review : CR#8004015 : [final (?) pass] Add interface extends and defaults for basic functional interfaces

[Mike Duigou]

On Dec 6 2012, at 03:59 , Chris Hegarty wrote:

> Mike,
> 
> Some small comments.
> 
> 1) IntUnaryOperator.java
> 
>    Typo in:
>  + 30  * <p>This is the primitive type specialization of {@link IntUnaryOperator} for
>  +  31  * {@code int} and also may be used as a {@code IntUnaryOperator<Integer>}. When
>  +  32  * used as a {@code IntUnaryOperator} the default {@code operate} implementation
>  +  33  * provided by this interface neither accepts null parameters nor does it return
>  +  34  * null results.
> 
>   IntUnaryOperator -> UnaryOperator

Corrected.

> 
> 2) Double/Int/Long Function
> 
>   "When used as a Function the default apply implementation provided
>    by this interface neither accepts null parameters nor does it
>    return null results."
> 
>    "When used as a Function", is this really necessary, or should the
>    behavior of the default apply method just be described?

I agree that this is somewhat awkward. I will see if I can't think of something better.


>    Why the restriction on null parameters, it seems overly restrictive
>    since applyAsXXXX accepts nulls, right?

Corrected. Thank you for noticing this.

> 3) package description
> 
>   "null values are accepted and returned by these functional
>    interfaces according to the constraints of the specification in
>    which the functional interfaces are used. The functional interfaces
>    themselves do not constrain or mandate use of null values. Most
>    usages of the functional interfaces will define the role, if any,
>    of null for that context."
> 
>    Given these changes, doesn't this need to be reworked ( to indicate
>    that some methods specify null value behavior)?
> 
> 4) Trivially, IntSupplier is missing a '<p>', before "This is the
>   primitive type..."
> 
> 5) I agree with David, NPE should be defined where applicable.

I am adding these though I am still somewhat resistant for reasons I will mention in next review cycle thread

Mike