One more pass on flatMap/mapMulti

[Tim Peierls]

Any of those three are an improvement, and extending Block seems
reasonable. (Though I still hesitate every time I see "Block" or "BiBlock"
-- the latter looks like "bib lock", something you would use to prevent an
infant from removing protective clothing.)

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com>wrote:

> I like the idea that whatever is passed to the block describes the
> downstream; the role of the block is to emit values downstream.  I think
> that makes things clearer about what's going on, which is good because what
> is going on is already not all that clear.
>
> I buy that "Downstream" could use some nounification.  (Calvin say:
> verbing weirds language.)
>
> DownstreamCollector
> DownstreamAcceptor
> DownstreamHandler
>
> accept() is OK, and we can make it extend Block.
>
>
> On 1/10/2013 12:28 PM, Tim Peierls wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com
>> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com**>> wrote:
>>
>>     Bikeshed discussions can continue.
>>
>>
>> OK, then! :-)
>>
>> The method name "send" is OK, but you wouldn't be seeing it in the
>> signature of explode. What you would see is Downstream<T>, which still
>> bugs me. The word "downstream" is an adverb or adjective, not a noun.
>> Things are sent downstream, they aren't sent *to* a downstream.
>>
>>
>> Was Acceptor.accept proposed and rejected already? If so, why? I would
>> understand
>>
>> explode(BiBlock<Acceptor<T>__, T>))
>>
>> --tim
>>
>