Hi,
Perhaps the Spliterator.trySplit() method should have been declared as:
Spliterator<? extends T> trySplit();
Regards, Peter
On 07/01/2013 05:50 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 07/01/2013 03:19 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
On 07/01/2013 01:36 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 07/01/2013 11:52 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
On 06/29/2013 02:58 AM, Henry Jen wrote:
Hi,
Please review the webrev that add concat static method to Stream and
primitive Streams.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~henryjen/ccc/8015315.0/webrev/
Cheers,
Henry
Hi Henry,
I find the the cast to Spliterator<T> in Streams.concat() dubious,
I can not see how it can be correct, could you explain why this
cast is Ok.
cheers,
Rémi
Hi,
Hi,
I think that if we want to concat say Stream<Integer> with
Stream<Long>, producing Stream<Number>, there would have to be an
unsafe cast somewhere. Since Stream<T> API apears to be covariant
(like for example Iterator<T>), casting Stream<? extends T> to
Stream<T> seems to be safe.
if Stream is covariant, it should be possible to create a Stream<T>
from a Spliterator<? extends T>,
so there is no need of such unsafe cast.
Sorry, I meant so say:
Spliterator<T> API apears to be covariant (like for example
Iterator<T>), so casting Spliterator<? extends T> toSpliterator <T>
seems to be safe.
Regarding creating Stream<T> from a Spliterator<? extends T> it
wouldn't help here, since we can't create Spliterator<? extends T>
from two spliterators: Spliterator<? extends T> and Spliterator<?
extends T> without unsafe cast in the first place...
So maybe we should bury the unsafe cast in the ConcatSpliterator's
constructor then...
Regards, Peter
Regards, Peter
cheers,
Rémi
