> On Nov 8, 2020, at 3:32 AM, fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
>
> It's a strawman but the effect is real, the more interfaces you have the less
> you can reuse code because the code is written with the wrong interface for
> your use case.
There are points of compromise. If someone can accept misbehavior, they can use
interfaces that are pure access interfaces, such as Iterator and Stream.
> Following the same reasoning, you can say that having interfaces saying that
> collections are null hostile is even more important because it alleviate the
> issue with NullPointerException.
My own immutable collection classes are also null-intolerant. No explosion
there. Use Optional instead.
> Array vs List is not something we can be very proud of, by example in
> java.lang.invoke, we have several methods that are duplicated only because of
> this dichotomy.
> File vs Path is less an issue because it's between implementation classes,
> not interfaces, anyway, you still have a number of methods inside
> java.io/java.nio <http://java.io/java.nio> that are duplicated.
Progress with backwards compatibility requires some duplication. It is nothing
to be ashamed about.
I’m more ashamed that Type<> notation cannot be used with arrays and []
notation cannot be used with Lists.
Alan
