Function type naming conventions

[Joe Bowbeer]

+1 ObjIntBlock (or a more descriptive "Block" name if one is selected)




On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:

> OK, I've completed:
>
>  - {Int,Long,Double}Function -> ToXxxFunction
>  - {Int,Long,Double}BiFunction -> ToXxxBiFunction
>  - Obj{Int,Long,Double}Function -> XxxFunction
>
> The remaining weird ones are:
>
>   ObjIntBiBlock  (T, int) -> void
>
> These could stay ObjIntBiBlock, or, with the "arity unnecessary if all
> args are specialized" rule tweak, could become:
>
>   ObjIntBlock
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> On 1/24/2013 2:03 PM, Joe Bowbeer wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Dan Smith <daniel.smith at oracle.com
>> <mailto:daniel.smith at oracle.**com <daniel.smith at oracle.com>>> wrote:
>>
>>     Let me propose a slightly different convention: if the base type is
>>     parameterized in both its parameters and return, then the "To"
>>     prefix is mandatory.  If not, "To" is not used.
>>
>>
>> This works for me if the base name is descriptive enough.
>>   IntSupplier, IntConsumer, even IntBlock (now that I know what a Block
>> is).
>>
>>     —Dan
>>
>>
>>