> In the CSR, I updated the webrev link to point to the latest, I set the
> fix-version to 12, and I set the scope to SE. I've marked the CSR reviewed.
>
> The next thing is for you to mark the CSR as Finalized.
Done, thanks!
With best regards,
Tagir Valeev
>
> Thanks,
>
> s'marks
>
>
> On
Webrev looks good.
In the CSR, I updated the webrev link to point to the latest, I set the
fix-version to 12, and I set the scope to SE. I've marked the CSR reviewed.
The next thing is for you to mark the CSR as Finalized.
Thanks,
s'marks
On 9/24/18 3:39 AM, Tagir Valeev wrote:
Ok,
Ok, teeing. Webrev updated:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tvaleev/webrev/8205461/r6/
CSR updated accordingly:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209685
With best regards,
Tagir Valeev.
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 8:26 PM Brian Goetz wrote:
>
> The example of ISS is a good one. It is analogous
The example of ISS is a good one. It is analogous to the question of
"when is it right to write a class, and when it is right to write a
function?" And the answer is, of course, "it depends." ISS was an
obvious grouping, but even there there was significant disagreement
during its design
I agree with Tagir that supporting more than two Collectors sounds risky. I
especially agree that well-typed and well-named accessors are important.
I use the quoted library (jOOL), but I:
- either avoid all those tuple-based functions,
- or I use only Tuple2/Tuple3 and I map the tuple to a
Hello, Brian!
Regarding more than two collectors. Some libraries definitely have
analogs (e.g. [1]) which combine more than two collectors. To my
opinion combining two collectors this way is an upper limit for
readable code. Especially if you are going to collect to the list, you
will have a list
tl;dr: "Duplexing" is an OK name, though I think `teeing` is less likely
to be a name we regret, for reasons outlined below.
The behavior of this Collector is:
- duplicate the stream into two identical streams
- collect the two streams with two collectors, yielding two results
- merge the
Hello!
Tomasz, Peter, Stuart, Remi, thank you for review and comments. I
updated the webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tvaleev/webrev/8205461/r5/
1. ? extends R -> R
2. parameter names c1, c2 -> downstream1, downstream2;
Objects.requireNonNull messages updated correspondingly
merger is left as
Hi all,
Stuart, thanks for your response and explanations, I really appreciate it!
Good point about function composition - didn't cross my mind, but it could
be confusing indeed.
As for "merger" - good point about "biFinisher", but I'm still unconvinced
about "merger", because usually, you
Hi,
I've already sent an email to this list regarding this issue, but I'm not
sure if it finally made its way. So here I'm sending something again w.r.t
the name...
duplexing might be OK, but
collectingBothAndThen
is hard to beat.
Arguments:
- Existing collectingAndThen method is the simpler
Hi Tagir, thanks for the update.
Also thanks Tomasz for keeping everybody honest on the open issues.
First, naming. I think "duplex" as the root word wins! Using "duplexing" to
conform to many of other collectors is fine; so, "duplexing" is good.
Unfortunately "duplex" is not really a verb.
Hi,
I'd like to remind three little things to which there was no response
(AFAIK):
1) Brian Goetz' suggestion of changing "? extends R" into "R":
-
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2018-August/054947.html
2) Stuart Marks' suggestion about renaming "c1" and "c2" to
I'm neither Stuart nor Peter but this looks good to me.
Rémi
- Mail original -
> De: "Tagir Valeev"
> À: "Stuart Marks"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Envoyé: Vendredi 14 Septembre 2018 10:41:53
> Objet: Re: RFR: JDK-8205461 Create Collector wh
Hi Tagir,
I like duplexing more than teeingAndThen. If consensus can be
established about the name, I think you will then want to update the CSR
draft to reflect new name. Then we'll kindly ask Stuart if he has any
more advice before submitting the CSR...
Regards, Peter
On 09/14/2018 10:41
Hello, Stuart and Peter!
Thank you for valuable comments. I updated the webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tvaleev/webrev/8205461/r4/
1. I renamed "teeingAndThen" to "duplexing". Brian insisted that
"-ing" suffix shall present and I agree. Hopefully it's final name.
2. I updated the spec as
public static Collector collectingAndThen(
Collector downstream,
Function finisher);
public static Collector collectingAndThen(
Collector downstream1,
Collector
On 8/21/18 12:04 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
- UNORDERED: should the returned collector be UNORDERED if *either* of the
provided collectors is UNORDERED? (Current draft says *both*.)
I think *both* is the right behavior. If you are collecting:
teeingAndThen(
Collectors.toList(),
I just note that sometimes naming is hard. Not because there would be no
suitable name to choose from but because there are too many. In such
situations it becomes apparent that every individual's brain works
slightly differently. That said, I must admit that teeingAndThen is not
my favorite
Hi Stuart,
On 08/21/2018 07:43 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
2. Characteristics
- UNORDERED: should the returned collector be UNORDERED if *either*
of the provided collectors is UNORDERED? (Current draft says *both*.)
I think *both* is the right behavior. If you are collecting:
Hi Tagir,
Thanks for working on this. This looks really cool! And thanks Peter for
agreeing to sponsor it.
I can help out with the CSR. My first bit of advice about the CSR process is to
hold off until the specification is complete. :-)
I think the intent of the API is fine, but I think
I note that the only place that R appears is in the output of the
merger. So the "? extends" is not needed there; it can be just
BiFunction.
On 8/20/2018 4:48 AM, Tagir Valeev wrote:
Hello!
A CSR is created:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209685
(this is my first CSR, hopefully I
Hi,
I think this is a very good addition to the Collectors API. Whereas somehow
specific, it will come in very handy when needed.
But the name... well, honestly, teeingAndThen doesn't tell me anything from
the perspective of an user of the API. What is 'teeing'? What does 'tee'
actually mean? Or
Hello!
A CSR is created:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209685
(this is my first CSR, hopefully I did it correctly)
With best regards,
Tagir Valeev.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 2:06 PM Peter Levart wrote:
>
> Hi Tagir,
>
> I think this looks very good. It just needs a CSR. Will you file
Hi Tagir,
I think this looks very good. It just needs a CSR. Will you file it?
Regards, Peter
On 08/19/2018 11:24 AM, Tagir Valeev wrote:
Hello, Brian!
Of the three phases, teeing is the most important and least obvious, so
I think something that includes that in the name is going to be
Hello, Brian!
> Of the three phases, teeing is the most important and least obvious, so
> I think something that includes that in the name is going to be
> helpful. Perhaps "teeingAndThen" is more evocative and not totally
> unwieldy.
Ok, sounds acceptable to me. Renamed pairing to
Hello, Peter!
Yes, I would be happy, though see also Roger note.
> Regarding the code, I only have one comment about the naming of the last
parameter: "finisher"
Sounds reasonable, renamed to "merger".
> ...and one comment about handling of IDENTITY_FINISH
I think this would complicate the
On 6/21/2018 12:33 AM, Tagir Valeev wrote:
Please review and sponsor:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205461
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tvaleev/webrev/8205461/r1/
See also previous discussion thread at [1]. It seems that we did not reach
the final conclusion about the collector
Hi,
As an API addition, it will need a CSR as well and it should have a
couple of
reviewers that are fully aware of Streams design.
Regards, Roger
On 8/7/18 4:08 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi Tagir,
Unless you have already got a sponsor (can't remember if somebody
already offered you a
Hi Tagir,
Unless you have already got a sponsor (can't remember if somebody
already offered you a sponsorship), I can volunteer.
Regarding the code, I only have one comment about the naming of the last
parameter: "finisher". To avoid confusion, it would be good to name it
differently from
Ping! Could you please review and sponsor this changeset?
I updated version tag from since 11 to since 12:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tvaleev/webrev/8205461/r2/
Thanks in advance!
With best regards,
Tagir Valeev.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:33 AM Tagir Valeev wrote:
> Please review and
30 matches
Mail list logo
