Combiner & BiFunction

[Remi Forax]

On 12/08/2012 04:52 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
> Yes, its on my list to rationalize these.

Can you also normalize the Function and Operator types name ?

when it was Mapper instead of Function, it was not a big deal, but now 
with the name Function, Operator and Function names are not aligned.

   Function -> UnaryOperator
   BiFunction -> BinaryOperator

also the experience of other language show that sometime user will want 
to create a function with 5 arguments,
we will obviously not add TriFunction, QuadriFunction, QuintiFunction, 
etc. in the jdk, I think that using a latin prefix to indicate the arity 
is not the best convention,
other languages tend to use Function, Function2, Function3 and so on.

so I propose
   Function -> Operator
   Function2 -> Operator2
with the convention that if there is no number the arity is 1.

also using a suffix is better because the primitive specialization use a 
prefix  (avoid the question, is it IntBiFunction or BiIntFunction ?)

regards,
Rémi

>
> On 12/8/2012 10:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
>> I've just found that we have the very same functional interface twice,
>> Combiner and BiFunction.
>>
>> Rémi
>>