Primitive streams and optional

[Tim Peierls]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

> This would be more appealing with OptionalXxx, moving the Supplier
>> argument away from the stream and onto the Optional object itself:
>>
>>     return s.least().or(() -> computeDefaultValue());
>>
>
> sorry, but why do you want to create an Optional if there is no option.
> When you provide a supplier, if there is no result, the supplier is called
> to provide one so at the end there is always a value. I like intermediary
> state in a builder only when necessary.
>

When I use "Optional" I mean specifically the Guava semantics. I think it's
worth the extra object creation to be able to simplify the stream API.

I understand that Doug and others disagree violently with me. :-)



Optional is interesting only if it's a pseudo class recognized by the
> language that let you call any methods you want on it,
> i.e. if Optional acts as a reified null object. We are far from that.
>

Straw man argument.

--tim