There's a large set of library changes that will be coming with Lambda. We're 
getting near the end of the runway and there's lots left to do so we want to 
start the process of getting some of the more stable pieces put back to the 
JDK8 repositories.  We've spent a some time slicing things into manageable 
chunks. This is the first bunch. We'd like to time-box this review at one week, 
since there are many more pieces to follow.

The first chunk is the basic set of functional interface types.  While this set 
is not complete, it is enough to be able to proceed on some other pieces.  This 
set contains no extension methods (we'll do those separately) and does not 
contain all the specializations we may eventually need.

The specification is limited; most of the interesting restrictions 
(side-effect-freedom, idempotency, stability) would really be imposed not by 
the SAM itself by by how the SAM is used in a calculation. However, some common 
doc for "how to write good SAMs" that we can stick in the package doc would be 
helpful. Suggestions welcome.

Elements of this naming scheme include:
- Each SAM type has a unique (arity, method name) pair.  This allows SAMs to 
implement other SAMs without collision.
- The argument lists are structured so that specializations act on the first 
argument(s), so IntMapper<T> is a specialization of Mapper<R,T>, and 
IntBinaryOperator is a specialization of BinaryOperator<T>.

In order to get the most useful feedback out of this review, we'd like to ask 
you follow the following guidelines for the review:

- We are time-boxed at one week. (until Nov. 7th)

- Please review the whole bunch in a single message if possible, rather than in 
bits and pieces.  It is far easier to extract useful feedback from one complete 
review than from a dozen partial ones.

- Please wait a few days before replying to other people's reviews! We want to 
keep the discussion on-topic to maximize the useful review content.  It is far 
too easy for the discussion to spiral off into minutia and lose sight of the 
goal -- which is to provide useful feedback on the API we're asking for 
feedback on.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/8001634/2/webrev/

Reply via email to