To Stream.slice(fromInclusive, toExclusive) or Stream.slice(toSkip, limit) that is the question

[Joe Bowbeer]

> Couldn't a negative limit be seen the same way if we wanted it to?

I guess so.  Though I'm more comfortable with a negative offset than a
negative quantity.

I forgot to mention that javascript also has slice(start, end)


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Sam Pullara <spullara at gmail.com> wrote:

> Couldn't a negative limit be seen the same way if we wanted it to?
>
> ---
> Sent from Boxer
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 01:12 PM, Joe Bowbeer ** wrote:
>
> Thanks for the example.
>
> In terms of readability, I think skip(offset).limit(size) works well in
> this case.
>
> I think slice(offset, offset+size) works fine here, as well.
>
> By the way, slice(start, end) has another potential advantage in that
> negative values for the 'end' argument can be interpreted as an offset from
> the end -- skipping the final x entries.
>
> --Joe
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com>wrote:
>
> If you have a non-indexed stream, why would you ever
> skip(start).limit(count) instead of simply limit(count)?
>
>
> Here's one use case: Paging.  You've got a stream of results, and you want
> to display them by pages.
>
>   Stream results = input.skip((pageNo-1)***pageSize).limit(pageSize);
>
>
> **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/lambda-libs-spec-experts/attachments/20131012/e347ad96/attachment.html