forEachOrdered semantics

[Tim Peierls]

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:

> So you are right that the intent of forEachOrdered did include some
> sequentiality to it.  So, question is, is the current naming and proposed
> semantics reasonable?


I think it's just confusing enough -- unreasonable enough -- to re-open the
naming question rather than trying to spec around it.

--tim