Primitive streams and optional

[Paul Sandoz]

On Nov 21, 2012, at 7:00 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

> On 11/21/2012 03:27 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
>>> I prefer the use of Optional<Integer>. I could live, begrudgingly, with OptionalInt, but i don't think there is a strong technical requirement for it.
>> The argument against OptionalInt vs Optional<Integer> is basically "OMG, N more classes."  If we did Doug's "Numeric" trick, we could get away with one new OptionalNumeric class.
>> 
>> 
> 
> There is a big difference between OptionalInt to Optional<Integer>, OptionalInt can be retrofitted to a value type at least with the current plan where Optional<Integer> requires full generification to be seen as a value type.
> 

Ah! well observed,
Touché,
Paul.