Substitute for groupingReduce ?

[Brian Goetz]

Yes, that's probably what's in the current public binary snapshot.  But 
the API has already evolved past that; should be a new snapshot this 
week.  Welcome to life on the bleeding edge!

On 3/20/2013 4:05 PM, Michael Nascimento wrote:
> There is no reducing in b81. What are you talking about? Maybe this:
>
> groupingBy(f).thenReducing(stuff)
>
> ?
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
>> More generally: all the forms of
>>    groupingReduce(f, stuff)
>> are now written as some form of
>>    groupingBy(f, reducing(stuff))
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/20/2013 3:49 PM, Michael Nascimento wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think you're missing a reduce function in that call?  I see a
>>>> classifying
>>>> function and a merge function.
>>>
>>>
>>> This compiled with b76. I am migrating a code base that was running
>>> with a previous JDK.
>>>
>>> So there is no substitute that assumes the returned value is a unique
>>> index and throws an Exception if it is not? This is what
>>> Maps.uniqueIndex does:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git/javadoc/com/google/common/collect/Maps.html#uniqueIndex(java.lang.Iterable,
>>> com.google.common.base.Function)
>>>
>>> and what the groupingReduce variant did with the throwingMerger. I
>>> still didn't quite understand how to rewrite this...
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Michael
>>>
>>