Hi Olexandr, Great question!
I guess a "simple" implementation of an N-ary concat could work, but it would have performance implications (think a recursive use of Stream.concat()) but if you look at the implementation of Stream.concat's backing Spliterator, you'll see how complex it would be to implement it in a truly N-ary way (a challenging exercise for the reader?): https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/Streams.java#L690 Cheers, √ Viktor Klang Software Architect, Java Platform Group Oracle ________________________________ From: core-libs-dev <[email protected]> on behalf of Olexandr Rotan <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, 17 September 2025 15:58 To: core-libs-dev <[email protected]> Subject: Stream.concat with varagrs Greetings to everyone on the list. When working on some routine tasks recently, I have encountered a, seemingly to me, strange decision in design of Stream.concat method, specifically the fact that it accepts exactly two streams. My concrete example was something along the lines of var studentIds = ...; var teacherIds = ...; var partnerIds = ...; return Stream.concat( studentIds.stream(), teacherIds.stream(), partnerIds.stream() // oops, this one doesn't work ) so I had to transform concat to a rather ugly Stream.concat( studentIds.stream(), Stream.concat( teacherIds.stream(), partnerIds.stream() ) ) Later on I had to add 4th stream of a single element (Stream.of), and this one became even more ugly When I first wrote third argument to concat and saw that IDE highlights it as error, I was very surprised. This design seems inconsistent not only with the whole java stdlib, but even with Stream.of static method of the same class. Is there any particular reason why concat takes exactly to arguments? I would say that, even if just in a form of sugar method that just does reduce on array (varagrs) of streams, this would be a great quality of life improvement, but I'm sure there also may be some room for performance improvement. Of course, there are workarounds like Stream.of + flatmap, but: 1. It gets messy when trying to concat streams of literal elements set (Stream.of) and streams of collections or arrays 2. It certainly has significant performance overhead 3. It still doesn't explain absence of varagrs overload of concat So, once again, is there any particular reason to restrict arguments list to exactly two streams? If not, I would be happy to contribute Stream.concat(Stream... streams) overload. Best regards
