Foo.Of{Int,Long,Double} naming convention

[Brian Goetz]

> Stream.OfInt instead of IntStream?

Where to draw the line is hard.  I did think about this but I think this 
is over the line; they're both big types, IntStream doesn't extend 
Stream, IntStream is much more than a trivial specialization of Stream.

Basically, I think the OfXxx works well when you wish you didn't have to 
have the types at all, and hiding them as nested types is an uneasy 
compromise.

> Do PrimitiveStreams methods become (top-level) methods in Streams?

Not sure what you mean?

> One disadvantage of this convention is that these names are hard to
> implement as extensions by 3rd parties. Suppose I need a ShortStream or
> a FloatStream. Or an IntFoo for some Foo without a Foo.OfInt, then I
> can't create Foo.OfInt, and IntFoo doesn't follow the naming convention.

Right.  Another reason why it fails for "big" abstractions.