RFR: 8004518 & 8010122 : Default methods on Map

[Peter Levart]

Hi Mike,

Just a nit: The order of boolean sub-expressions in Map.replace(key, 
oldValue, newValue):

  740         if (!containsKey(key) || !Objects.equals(get(key), oldValue))


...would be more optimal if reversed (like in Map.remove(key, value)).

Regards, Peter

On 04/13/2013 12:02 AM, Mike Duigou wrote:
> I have updated the webrev with these changes and a few more.
>
> merge() required an update to it's specification to correctly account for null values.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/JDK-8010122/5/webrev/
>
> This version is currently undergoing final pre-integration testing. Unless additional problems are found or the testing fails this version will be integrated.
>
> Mike
>
> On Apr 12 2013, at 12:53 , Mike Duigou wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the corrections. I have incorporated all of these into the integration version of the patch.
>>
>> On Apr 12 2013, at 12:50 , Akhil Arora wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> a few small things -
>>>
>>> UnmodifiableMap.forEach
>>> is missing Objects.requireNonNull(action);
>> Added.
>>
>>> EmptyMap.replaceAll(BiFunction)
>>> should just return instead of throwing UnsupportedOpEx
>>> particularly since EmptyList.replaceAll also returns silently
>>> after checking if function is null to fulfil the NPE contract
>> I agree.
>>
>>> Hashtable
>>> is missing a synchronized override of forEach
>> added.
>>
>>> CheckedMap.typeCheck(BiFunction)
>>> is missing from the patch (won't compile without it)
>> Apparently I forgot a qrefresh before generating the webrev. I had this in my local copy as it's necessary.
>>
>>> On 04/11/2013 01:03 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
>>>> Another revision incorporating primarily documentation feedback.
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/JDK-8010122/2/webrev/
>>>>
>>>> I've also included the java.util.Collections overrides for the default methods. All of these are performance enhancements--the semantics were already correct because the defaults use only public methods.
>>>>
>>>> This is likely, modulo formatting of the source examples, the version that will be pushed to TL on Friday unless somebody squawks.
>>>>
>>>> Moving the current compute, computeIfPresent, computeIfAbsent and merge defaults to ConcurrentMap and replacing the current Map defaults with versions that throw ConcurrentModificationException will likely be resolved in a future issue if the EG determines it to be important.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 10 2013, at 22:42 , Mike Duigou wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've posted an updated webrev with the review comments I have received.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/JDK-8010122/1/webrev/
>>>>>
>>>>> One important point to consider:
>>>>>
>>>>> - The current implementations of compute, computeIfPresent, computeIfAbsent, merge are implemented so that they can work correctly for ConcurrentMap instances. For non-concurrent implementations it might be better to fail and throw ConcurrentModification exception whenever concurrent modification is detected. For regular Map implementations the retry behaviour will only serve to mask errors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 8 2013, at 11:07 , Mike Duigou wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello all;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a combined review for the new default methods on the java.util.Map interface being added for the JSR-335 lambda libraries. The reviews are being combined because they share a common unit test.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/JDK-8010122/0/webrev/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8004518: Add in-place operations to Map
>>>>>> forEach()
>>>>>> replaceAll()
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8010122: Add atomic operations to Map
>>>>>> getOrDefault()
>>>>>> putIfAbsent()          *
>>>>>> remove(K, V)
>>>>>> replace(K, V)
>>>>>> replace(K, V, V)
>>>>>> compute()              *
>>>>>> merge()                *
>>>>>> computeIfAbsent()      *
>>>>>> computeIfPresent()     *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The * operations treat null values as being absent. (ie. the same as there being no mapping for the specified key).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The default implementations provided in Map are overridden in HashMap for performance purposes, in Hashtable for atomicity and performance purposes and in Collections for atomicity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike