> On 8 Feb 2016, at 15:53, Tagir F. Valeev <amae...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello! > > Sorry, I don't understand how passing AbstractList would help.
Yeah, sorry ignore what i sad about AbstractList, was not thinking properly in my attempt to unify. > We > still need direct access to the elementData array of the original > ArrayList for efficiency, and this field is also late-binding, so we > need to have a reference to the ArrayList as well even in SubList > case. SubList reference is also necessary, because we need to get size > and modCount from it. So we have need both ArrayList and SubList and > cannot replace them with single AbstractList. Note that my current > implementation does not introduce new virtual calls at all. > > Surely it's possible to duplicate the Spliterator implementation. I > have some doubts that it's reasonable, because this would increase the > maintenance cost. Current Spliterator does the job pretty well for > both SubList and original ArrayList. Nevertheless, if you think it's > better I can create separate class (ArrayListSubListSpliterator? > ArrayListSubSpliterator? SubListSpliterator?) leaving the original > ArrayListSpliterator as is. > Re: maintenance, ordinarily i would agree with you, but ArrayList is kind of special being probably the most used collection class. Using an anon-impl for SubList.spliterator seem ok in that respect. > I'm just worrying a little that my changes might conflict with Ivan > Gerasimov's pending 8079136 issue, so probably it would be better to > wait till it's reviewed and pushed… > Yes, i was wondering about that too. Paul.
