On 25 September 2015 at 11:58, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote: > Please review this change to add a method Optional.or that allows one to > better compose optionals: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8080418-optional-or/webrev/
New method seems fine. > Separately while we are on the topic of Optional i would be interested in > opinions on the following changes: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/optional-prims-filter-map/webrev/ > > 1) add methods that were missing on the primitive specializations; and Seems fine, although I think a good case can be made for mapToObj() - while going via a stream is possible, it is non-intuitive. I don't think mapToInt() or mapToLong() are necessary on OptionalDouble (and so on), but not being able to reach Object will be restrictive.. > 2) add to all variants a mapOrElseGet (otherwise known as a “fold”), which is > the equivalent of map(mapper).orElseGet(supplier). That is arguably less > mind-bending to use when transforming from Optional<T> to Optional<U>. To me, this is pointless, and makes the API more confusing. Chaining methods is a way of life in Java 8, and developers have to be able to think that way. Stephen
