Oh and btw - would you go for lambda with or without additional type info before parameter name?
-Sven On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Sven Reimers <sven.reim...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok. Here you go... > > I just did an inspection run for the controls module and my IDE came up > with (drum roll) 888 possible lambda conversions.. > > Looking through them I discovered that usage of <> (aka diamond syntax) is > not used (or at least not used a lot) in at least the controls modules. > My IDE showed me 1171 occurrences. > > Is there a good reason not to use diamonds? > > Will now try to apply all those changes and figure out if this still > builds... up next: go through the other modules... > > -Sven > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Richard Bair <richard.b...@oracle.com>wrote: > >> Brian was telling me at J1 that whether parallel gets you performance or >> not depends on the size of the collection and the complexity of the work to >> perform. There is definitely a point at which parallel helps -- and a point >> at which it hurts. >> >> Richard >> >> On Oct 3, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Hervé Girod <herve.gi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Here is a nice example, taking advantage of the ease of going parallel. >> Apparently the performance without parallel will also further improve. >> http://blog.hersen.name/blog/2013/10/01/project-lambda-it-was-worth-the-wait/ >> > >> > Hervé >> > >> > Sent from my iPad >> > >> >> On 4 oct. 2013, at 00:20, David Grieve <david.gri...@oracle.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> And what about Stream? I like the declarative code that comes from >> using Stream and I can see places in the code where Stream could be used, >> but I wonder about its performance relative to iterators and/or enhanced >> for loops. >> >> >> >> On Oct 3, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Richard Bair <richard.b...@oracle.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>>> Hello, OpenJFX Community. >> >>>> >> >>>> There's a question about using Java 8 features in FX. >> >>>> >> >>>> I've been working on the support for InputMethods in JFXPanel which >> is an important feature for many users who speak hieroglyphic languages. >> >>>> The issue is tracked under: >> https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-13248 >> >>>> >> >>>> In order to have a high-quality support we need to change >> javafx.scene.input.InputMethodRequests interface and introduce 3 new >> methods. This is not needed for pure FX applications right now, but >> absolutely required for InputMethods in the JFXPanel. However, the >> interface is public and it was present since FX2.0, so changing it would >> become a breaking change. So the only way to avoid the problem is using the >> default methods. Those would return some stub values, the JDK is OK with >> that, as it would not crash or throw exceptions, but text composition would >> not work correctly. >> >>>> >> >>>> I know that we want to avoid using the Java 8 features in the JFX-8, >> so I wanted to ask - is it OK to use the default methods here? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> If you are staying away from JDK8 features for the JFX78 backport, >> don't worry. There are more issues with new JDK8 APIs than with the new >> language features. >> >>>> >> >>>> For example there were default methods put into some collections >> classes that we solved by pushing them down to the first implements. But >> the Date and Time picker depends on the new time package. The threeten >> backport won't be updated until after 8 ships, so that has been removed so >> far. >> >>>> >> >>>> I'de be interested to know what a wholesale lamdaization would >> result in speed wise and code size wise (both source and compiled). From >> what I can tell the IDEs can lambda and de-lambda fairly easily, so it jsut >> makes the backport more of a busy work proposition. If there were >> performance gains it would also make a great front page story in the next >> java magazine or a case study.. >> >>> >> >>> After having used Lambda's for JavaOne, I'd love to make the >> conversion, even if in the end the performance was the same, because the >> savings in noise in the Java files is so big. At one time I just took the >> concurrent classes and lambda-ized them to measure the impact on those >> classes. You could maybe pick a package and just lambda-ize that one >> package and see what happens in terms of size reduction. We might see: >> >>> >> >>> + A reduction in the overall class size (not pack-200'd) >> >>> - An increase in startup time (have to spin up synthetic classes >> created at usage time) >> >>> +/- And increase or decrease in performance >> >>> + A decrease in source code >> >>> >> >>> It would be interesting to get some data for these points and see >> what effect lambda's have. Especially if an IDE can just do it in bulk… >> >>> >> >>> Richard >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Sven Reimers > > * Senior Expert Software Architect > * NetBeans Dream Team Member: http://dreamteam.netbeans.org > * Community Leader NetBeans: http://community.java.net/netbeans > Desktop Java: > http://community.java.net/javadesktop > * Duke's Choice Award Winner 2009 > * Blog: http://nbguru.blogspot.com > > * XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Sven_Reimers8 > * LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/svenreimers > > Join the NetBeans Groups: > * XING: http://www.xing.com/group-20148.82db20 > * NUGM: http://haug-server.dyndns.org/display/NUGM/Home > * LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1860468 > http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=107402 > http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1684717 > * Oracle: https://mix.oracle.com/groups/18497 > -- Sven Reimers * Senior Expert Software Architect * NetBeans Dream Team Member: http://dreamteam.netbeans.org * Community Leader NetBeans: http://community.java.net/netbeans Desktop Java: http://community.java.net/javadesktop * Duke's Choice Award Winner 2009 * Blog: http://nbguru.blogspot.com * XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Sven_Reimers8 * LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/svenreimers Join the NetBeans Groups: * XING: http://www.xing.com/group-20148.82db20 * NUGM: http://haug-server.dyndns.org/display/NUGM/Home * LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1860468 http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=107402 http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1684717 * Oracle: https://mix.oracle.com/groups/18497
