On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:29:44 Mario Torre wrote: > > Yes, but that exactly how it works now, that's why second invocation of > > hasNext() returns false and we can see the issue Remi is talking about. If > > hasNext() will be throwing ConcurrentModification than will work as early > > warning system that something is wrong with this iterator. > > But hasNext isn't modifying things, why should it throw > ConcurrentModification? I would find it very confusing, and also > likely non backward compatible.
Yes. More than that, guide page says directly that you should not use for-each for filtering [1]. Which means that what Remi has reported is not an issue, just incorrectly applied for-each iterator, and probably the least effective way to filter out the list. But as discussion went on with this in search of solution - I still cannot see any other way to fix it than throw ConcurrentModification from hasNext(). [1]: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/language/foreach.html -- Regards, Stas
