On 3 Oct 2022, at 14:32, Stuart Marks wrote: > … > The Arrays class does need some attention and probably should be considered > separately. It's lacking some other things too, like reverse(). One issue > with modifying the Arrays class is providing overloads for some or all of the > primitives. We've kind of held off because adding primitive overloads adds to > the clutter of an already-cluttered class. There are some functions that > support only "common" primitives int/long/double (see Arrays::setAll) which > reduces the clutter; but I've missed overloads for certain arrays like byte[]. > > (I'm not saying not to do this; I'm saying this is more than dropping in a > single Arrays::shuffle method.)
FTR, since we are talking about shuffles and other permutations, I’d like to bring up a pet RFE for Arrays: <https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8265378> Arrays.sort should provide optional external comparator for int and long arrays And to round out a story that’s been bubbling in my mind for a while, here is another pet RFE to keep it company: <https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294879> Arrays.sort should be accompanied by permutation vector operations
