Heads up: Mapper<T, R> -> Mapper<R, T>

[Sam Pullara]

What do people think about using more semantic names for these? I realize
that it has been pretty standard to use single letters but I would find

Mapper<To, From>

to be much more palatable.

Sam


On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Jonathan Gibbons <
jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com> wrote:

> I and O would be OK, I was just afraid we were headed for T, U, V, W.
>
> -- Jon
>
>
> On 11/06/2012 11:06 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> > Is R and P better than I and O? I don't think I could guess R and P
> > without reading the javadoc. I and O, I can (no pun).
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Jonathan Gibbons
> > <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com <mailto:jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >     Can I suggest that we at least try and establish some naming
> >     convention
> >     as well, so that we are not just relying on positional conventions.
> >
> >     There are already some JDK APIs with "result first, then parameter",
> >     using the convention   Name<R, P>   R for Result, P for Parameter
> >
> >     -- Jon
> >
> >
> >
> >     On 11/06/2012 10:36 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
> >     > On 11/06/2012 06:20 PM, Sam Pullara wrote:
> >     >> Neither Scala nor Guava makes this ordering choice. Let's not
> >     be innovative
> >     >> where it doesn't matter and will only cause confusion.
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >
> http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git/javadoc/com/google/common/base/Function.html
> >     >> http://www.scala-lang.org/api/current/scala/Function1.html
> >     >>
> >     >> Sam
> >     > I don't care about the order we choose if it's the same
> >     everywhere :)
> >     > For the record, C# uses the same order too.
> >     >
> >     > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb397687.aspx
> >     >
> >     > Rémi
> >     >
> >     >> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Paul Sandoz
> >     <paul.sandoz at oracle.com <mailto:paul.sandoz at oracle.com>> wrote:
> >     >>
> >     >>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Aleksey Shipilev
> >     <aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com <mailto:aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com>>
> >     >>> wrote:
> >     >>>
> >     >>>> On 11/06/2012 10:42 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> >     >>>>> To align better with EG discussions some nominal function
> >     types, such
> >     >>>>> as Mapper/FlatMapper, were modified such that the type
> >     parameter for
> >     >>>>> the return type is declared first rather than last.
> >     >>>> And the rationale for Combiner<W, T, W> -> Combiner<W, W, T>
> >     in the
> >     >>>> reduceBy is the same?
> >     >>>>
> >     >>> Yes, that change is the result of refactoring the type
> >     parameter order on
> >     >>> Combiner:
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/diff/e60b1819b652/src/share/classes/java/util/functions/Combiner.java
> >     >>>
> >     >>> i.e. the last type parameter, W that is the result type, is
> >     shuffled up to
> >     >>> become the first.
> >     >>>
> >     >>> Paul.
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>