Stuart, This is looking very good, and simple. Nice.
Sorry if this has come up already, but is the "@return the newly created xxx” too restrictive? Will it require the implementation to return a NEW instance of xxx for each invocation, even of() ? -Chris. On 24 Nov 2015, at 06:26, Stuart Marks <stuart.ma...@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Please review these API and implementation changes that comprise the first > integration of JEP 269. I intend to push this under the "initial API and > skeleton implementation" subtask, JDK-8139232. > > Changes since the previous review: > - more precise wording regarding static factory methods (thanks Remi) > - add defensive copy and test for List.of(E...) (thanks Michael Hixson) > - more null checking and tests > - various small wording cleanups > - @since 9 > > I've left the fixed-arg overloads at ten for all three interfaces. The > fixed-arg methods provide a useful fast path for initialization and > non-desktop, non-server cases. The cost is some API clutter; ten elements or > pairs is rather a lot. This number should be sufficient, though, to handle > the vast majority of cases without having to switch to varargs. Note that the > clutter is only in the API definitions, and it doesn't intrude into the point > of call (at least for List and Set). For the Map case, it's particularly > useful to have lots of fixed-arg overloads, since the varargs case requires > switching APIs and adding more boilerplate. > > I've also updated the JEP text to reflect the current proposal, mainly the > removal of the static factory methods from the concrete classes. > > JEP: > > http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/269 > > API spec (basically List, Map, and Set): > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/jep269/api.20151123/ > > Specdiff: > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/jep269/specdiff.20151123/overview-summary.html > > Webrev: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/jep269/webrev.20151123/ > > Thanks, > > s'marks
