On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 15:17:57 GMT, Viktor Klang <vkl...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> It's still possible to have a situation where PECS signature could be >> useful, and I don't see any downsides. A user may want to reuse the same >> static integrator instead of creating several identical lambdas just because >> the target type is more specific. Sometimes, people complain later, and >> you'll have to fix this. For example, see that `Stream.generate()` [was >> fixed separately](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8132097). So why not >> doing this from the very beginning? > > @amaembo In this case, given that it is intended as Preview, I think it makes > sense to receive some user feedback on this. Note that Collector has been > without PECS for Collector.of since 1.8: > [of](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/stream/Collector.html#of-java.util.function.Supplier-java.util.function.BiConsumer-java.util.function.BinaryOperator-java.util.function.Function-java.util.stream.Collector.Characteristics...-) > > Right now I don't want to deviate from the Collector-heritage until there's > more usage feedback, and I'm definitely not ruling out that PECS:ing the > factories might be worth it. I don't see the point of waiting here. Usually requests for PECSing signatures always comes two or three years after the API is realing when people starts to use the API in anger so the preview time is likely not enough. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16420#discussion_r1386958540
