Into

[Paul Sandoz]

On Dec 22, 2012, at 6:16 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at Oracle.COM> wrote:

> Right.  You want to do the upstream stuff in parallel, then you want to do the downstream stuff (a) serially, (b) in the current thread, and probably (c) in encounter order.
> 
> So, assume for sake of discussion that we have some form of .toList(), whether as a "native" operation or some sort of reduce/combine/tabulate.  Then you can say:
> 
>  parallelStream()...toList().forEach(...)
> 
> and the list-building will happen in parallel and then forEach can help sequentially.
> 
> Given that, is there any reason left for sequential()?
> 

Only if we change it so that it is a partial barrier.

Paul.