Collectors update
Brian Goetz
brian.goetz at oracle.com
Tue Feb 5 12:22:02 PST 2013
I concur with Kevin.
On 2/5/2013 3:20 PM, Kevin Bourrillion wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr
> <mailto:forax at univ-mlv.fr>> wrote:
>
> 4. Rejigger Partition to return an array again, with an
> explicit
> lambda (which will likely be an array ctor ref) to make
> the array.
> Eliminated the silly Partition class.
>
>
> Please don't do that, it's pure evil.
> public static<T> Collector<T, Collection<T>[]>
> partitioningBy(Predicate<T> predicate,
> IntFunction<Collection<T>[]>
> arraySupplier) {
>
>
> I've refactored this to make the partition collectors return
> Map<Boolean, X>.
>
>
> I think returning a boolean -> T (or Boolean -> T) is better because
> it's conceptually more lightweight than a Map.
> I expect to see more function instead of a Map returned as result of
> a method.
>
>
> I'd have to disagree; I expect function objects to be little things I
> pass /in/, but I think it's more intuitive to expect a proper data
> structure back out.
>
>
> --
> Kevin Bourrillion | Java Librarian | Google, Inc. |kevinb at google.com
> <mailto:kevinb at google.com>
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-experts
mailing list