On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 12:14:52 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadam...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> That was intentional as the list is always `0..size` whereas a map can use >> arbitrary inputs. Is there a better way to illustrate this than what we have >> now? > > I guess my "beef" is that the examples for int function and function are > similar -- they use same class name. Reader might expect (as I did) that they > do the same thing, just using a different backing storage. But they don't -- > not only is the implementation tweaked to use function instead of int > function -- also what is cached changes subtly. I'm afraid this will be > difficult to follow for readers. If you want to highlight that the "function" > example has more freedom, I think we'd be better off with using another > example. For instance: > > * use square(int)->int to show off int function/list > * use square_root(int)->int to show off function/map (e.g. stable int function is good for _total functions_ -- stable function is good for _partial functions_) ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23972#discussion_r2026878559
