Forms for reduce() -- part 1
Brian Goetz
brian.goetz at oracle.com
Fri Dec 14 13:24:20 PST 2012
I thought was using "so" to mean "I agree with your conclusion, but not
your assumption, but here's an alternate reasoning that supports your
conclusion anyway" :)
I think "mutableReduce" is a fair balance between a small number of
extra characters and some extra meaning.
On 12/14/2012 4:15 PM, Tim Peierls wrote:
> That was an example of the use of "so" to mean "no", wasn't it? :-)
>
> So really grody names are out. Is there something better than reduceMutably?
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> So, right now most inject-style use cases will be mutable, since the
> containers we have (ArrayList, StringBuilder) are mutable. Over
> time, we will likely see more immutable data structures, so maybe
> over time the problem solves itself.
>
>
> On 12/14/2012 4:03 PM, Tim Peierls wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Brian Goetz
> <brian.goetz at oracle.com <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>__>> wrote:
>
> So, the question remains -- is the word "mutable"
> (or some
> other way of saying that) a helpful guide about what is
> being done here, or pedantic noise that will
> irritate the
> users? (Note that I think we should care much less
> how it
> makes people feel when *writing* code than how it helps
> comprehension when *reading* code.)
>
>
> I don't think it's noise. It's going to be less common to come
> across
> "mutable" forms in practice, since they'll be harder to work with
> and will typically have to be wrapped in something more friendly.
> (That's my prediction, anyway.) So I think long descriptive
> names are
> fine here, like reduceThroughSideEffects or reduceHereBeDragons.
>
> --tim
>
>
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-observers
mailing list