Tagir,
Nothing is wrong with it, but I think the addition of the convenience
method(s) would help to improve readability in some cases. Personally, I'd
much rather have the option of writing `.count("Java::equals")` than
`.filter("Java"::equals).count()`. As Zheka stated, this type of
convenience method could also be useful for findFirst, in addition to
findAny, distinct, etc.
Thanks,
Jacob Glickman
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 4:46 AM Tagir Valeev <amae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What's wrong with `filter(predicate).count()`? Saving nine characters?
>
> With best regards,
> Tagir Valeev.
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:02 AM Jacob Glickman <jhg...@bucknell.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > I see myself having to often call count() as a terminal operation on a
> > Stream immediately after performing a filter operation. How feasible
> would
> > it be to add an overloaded count() method that accepts a Predicate, which
> > it uses as a filter before returning the count of elements in the Stream?
> > If this is supported, I'd gladly create the webrev & tests for it!
> >
> > I suppose the method signature can be something along the lines of:
> >
> > long count(Predicate<? super T> predicate)
> >
> > It would also seem reasonable to give this method to IntStream,
> > DoubleStream, and LongStream, but allowing them to use IntPredicate,
> > DoublePredicate, and LongPredicate respectively.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jacob Glickman
>
