(Just getting back from vacation) This seems like a reasonable idea. There has been some concern about adding defaulted non-static methods to these core interfaces because of potential collisions with existing implementations abut that would not seem to be a concern with static methods.
On Jun 26 2013, at 09:47 , Stephen Colebourne wrote: > Sending this on to core-libs-dev to try to get a response ;-) > Stephen > > On 24 June 2013 16:14, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> wrote: >> One point lambdaification that I haven't seen mentioned is addition >> static factory methods for the main collection interfaces. (Strictly, >> this proposal is not point lambdaification as it does not involve >> lambdas, but it is very much in the same area). >> >> I propose adding these static methods: >> Collection.empty() >> Collection.of(T...) >> List.empty() >> List.of(T...) >> Set.empty() >> Set.of(T...) >> Map.empty() >> Map.of(Entry...) >> Map.Entry.of(K, V) >> >> Each of these methods would return immutable implementations. >> There is a case for extending the methods to Iterator and other >> collection types, however these are the most important. >> These follow the designs of Stream static methods IIRC. >> >> This library change would remove much of the requirement for the >> "collection literals" change discussed in Project Coin. >> >> Implementation would ideally be via new dedicated immutable classes, >> however space could be saved by simply reusing the existing classes. I would prefer to use existing Collections implementations. Primarily because they have already been thoroughly used. Any reason to use new dedicated classes? >> >> Is this something we could fit in? (Is resourcing the problem, or the idea?) Patches are *always* welcome and are usually more grease to make things happen than just a squeaky wheel. :-) Without a patch I wouldn't be willing to commit that this RFE would make it into Java 8. Mike >> >> thanks >> Stephen
