r
their “potential problems” categories.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Stuart Marks
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 03:13
To: joe darcy;Andrew Haley
Cc: core-libs-dev
Subject: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
On 10/18/15 10:45 AM, joe darcy wrote:
> On 10/17/
;
and I'm left wondering how much utility is in a truly immutable List that
no-one else can freely share trusting it to be immutable. Having to sprinkle
some List.ensureImmutable(immaybemutableList) method calls everywhere would be
pretty bad.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From:
On 10/18/15 10:45 AM, joe darcy wrote:
On 10/17/2015 10:10 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 10/17/2015 05:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
(I view calling an "inherited" class static method to be poor coding style, but
neither javac nor NetBeans warns about it.)
That surely can be fixed. Should we start
On 10/17/2015 06:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 10/10/15 6:55 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
There is an issue with LinkedHashMap (resp LinkedHashSet),
it inherits from HashMap /facepalm/, and static methods are
accessible through class inheritance /facepalm/.
So if LinkedHashMap doesn't declare som
On 10/17/2015 10:10 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 10/17/2015 05:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
(I view calling an "inherited" class static method to be poor coding style, but
neither javac nor NetBeans warns about it.)
That surely can be fixed. Should we start a feature request?
I believe
java
Thank you Stuart for yours comments!
On 17.10.2015 20:23, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 10/14/15 5:56 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
Map m1 = MyCollections.
ofKeys( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
.vals( 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e');
Yes, we considered a bunch of different
On 10/14/15 10:56 AM, Kevin Bourrillion wrote:
(Sorry that Guava questions were asked and I didn't notice this thread sooner.)
Hi Kevin, thanks for this feedback. It's still timely, as it's helping to
improve the proposal.
Note that we have empirically learned through our Lists/Sets/Maps factory
On 10/14/15 5:56 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
Map m1 = MyCollections.
ofKeys( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
.vals( 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e');
Yes, we considered a bunch of different alternatives.
It looks like you're wrestling a bit with type inference :-), gi
On 10/17/2015 05:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> (I view calling an "inherited" class static method to be poor coding style,
> but
> neither javac nor NetBeans warns about it.)
That surely can be fixed. Should we start a feature request?
Andrew.
On 10/17/2015 05:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> (I view calling an "inherited" class static method to be poor coding style,
> but
> neither javac nor NetBeans warns about it.)
That surely can be fixed. Should we start a feature request?
Andrew.
On 10/10/15 6:55 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
There is an issue with LinkedHashMap (resp LinkedHashSet),
it inherits from HashMap /facepalm/, and static methods are accessible through
class inheritance /facepalm/.
So if LinkedHashMap doesn't declare some methods of(),
LinkedHashMap.of("foo")
will
On 14 October 2015 at 18:56, Kevin Bourrillion wrote:
> Note that we have empirically learned through our Lists/Sets/Maps factory
> classes that varargs factory methods for mutable collections are almost
> entirely useless.
Having taken a few days to think it over, I reluctantly think that
Kevin
---
> De: "John Rose"
> À: "Kevin Bourrillion"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 14 Octobre 2015 22:46:40
> Objet: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
>
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 10:56 AM, Kevin Bourrillion wrote
ample,
LinkedHashMap.of() will return a HashMap.
so +1 to have methods of() only on interfaces.
Rémi
- Mail original -
> De: "John Rose"
> À: "Kevin Bourrillion"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 14 Octobre 2015 22:46:40
> Objet: Re:
?
Rémi
- Mail original -
> De: "Stephen Colebourne"
> À: "core-libs-dev"
> Envoyé: Jeudi 15 Octobre 2015 16:28:00
> Objet: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
>
> I've been working on a Java 8 wrapper class around double
> On 15 Oct 2015, at 16:28, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
> I've been working on a Java 8 wrapper class around double[] in my day
> job, and added the following factory method:
>
> /**
> * Obtains an instance with entries filled using a function.
> *
> * The function is passed the array i
I've been working on a Java 8 wrapper class around double[] in my day
job, and added the following factory method:
/**
* Obtains an instance with entries filled using a function.
*
* The function is passed the array index and returns the value for
that index.
*
* @param size the
gt;From: Paul Sandoz
>Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 11:38
>Cc: core-libs-dev
>Subject: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection
>Factories
>
>
>
>> On 14 Oct 2015, at 06:18, Stuart Marks
>wrote:
>> I'm not entirely sure what to take from
.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Kevin Bourrillion
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 19:56
To: Stuart Marks
Cc: core-libs-dev
Subject: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
(Sorry that Guava questions were asked and I didn't notice this thread
sooner.)
On Oct 14, 2015, at 10:56 AM, Kevin Bourrillion wrote:
> Anyway, since we created these methods, they became an attractive nuisance,
> and thousands of users reach for them who would have been better off in
> every way using an immutable collection. Our fondest desire is to one day
> be able to de
Hi Stuart!
Most of the API is pretty straightforward, with fixed-arg and varargs
"of()" factories for List, Set, ArrayList, and HashSet; and with
fixed-arg "of()" factories and varargs "ofEntries()" factories for Map
and HashMap.
Has it been considered to separate a Map creation into two s
;Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 11:38
>Cc: core-libs-dev
>Subject: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection
>Factories
>
>
>
>> On 14 Oct 2015, at 06:18, Stuart Marks
>wrote:
>> I'm not entirely sure what to take from this. If it were clearly
&g
eft on the table.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Paul Sandoz
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 11:38
Cc: core-libs-dev
Subject: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 06:18, Stuart Marks wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure what to take
On 14 October 2015 at 10:38, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> On 14 Oct 2015, at 06:18, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> I'm not entirely sure what to take from this. If it were clearly
>> exponential, we could say with confidence that above a certain threshold
>> there would be vanishingly little benefit adding mo
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 06:18, Stuart Marks wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure what to take from this. If it were clearly exponential,
> we could say with confidence that above a certain threshold there would be
> vanishingly little benefit adding more arguments. But since the curve seems
> to flatte
On 10/10/15 9:10 AM, Louis Wasserman wrote:
If you're asking about why we stopped where we did, we collected actually
rather a lot of data on the size of static collection constants using
immutable collections, both with builder syntax and without.
https://github.com/google/guava/issues/2071#is
olebourne"
> > À: "core-libs-dev"
> > Envoyé: Vendredi 9 Octobre 2015 15:11:47
> > Objet: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
> >
> > On 9 October 2015 at 00:39, Stuart Marks
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > &g
- Mail original -
> De: "Stephen Colebourne"
> À: "core-libs-dev"
> Envoyé: Vendredi 9 Octobre 2015 15:11:47
> Objet: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
>
> On 9 October 2015 at 00:39, Stuart Marks wrote:
[...]
>
- Mail original -
> De: "Stuart Marks"
> À: "Stephen Colebourne"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Envoyé: Samedi 10 Octobre 2015 01:11:09
> Objet: Re: RFC: draft API for JEP 269 Convenience Collection Factories
>
>
>
> On 10/9/15 6:
On 10/9/15 6:11 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
On 9 October 2015 at 00:39, Stuart Marks wrote:
1. Number of fixed arg overloads.
Guava follows this pattern:
of(T)
of(T, T)
of(T, T, T)
of(T, T, T, T... elements)
whereas the proposal has
of(T)
of(T, T)
of(T, T, T)
of(T... elements)
I'd be
On 10/8/15 7:39 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
I don't think the statements "Creates an unmodifiable set containing X elements"
is always true. Since sets cannot have duplicates, it's possible passing in X
elements gives you less than that based on equality. I think the Set docs should
say "...X poss
On 09/10/15 13:08, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
On 10/09/2015 04:39 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
I don't think the statements "Creates an unmodifiable set containing X
elements" is always true. Since sets cannot have duplicates, it's
possible
passing in X elements gives you less than that based on equal
On 9 October 2015 at 00:39, Stuart Marks wrote:
> 1. Number of fixed arg overloads.
Guava follows this pattern:
of(T)
of(T, T)
of(T, T, T)
of(T, T, T, T... elements)
whereas the proposal has
of(T)
of(T, T)
of(T, T, T)
of(T... elements)
I'd be interested to know why Guava did it that way and w
Hi,
On 10/09/2015 04:39 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
I don't think the statements "Creates an unmodifiable set containing X
elements" is always true. Since sets cannot have duplicates, it's possible
passing in X elements gives you less than that based on equality. I think
the Set docs should say "..
I don't think the statements "Creates an unmodifiable set containing X
elements" is always true. Since sets cannot have duplicates, it's possible
passing in X elements gives you less than that based on equality. I think
the Set docs should say "...X possible elements if unique". Wordsmith
something
Hi all,
Please review and comment on this draft API for JEP 269, Convenience Collection
Factories. For this review I'd like to focus on the API, and set aside
implementation issues and discussion for later.
JEP:
http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/269
javadoc:
http://cr.openjdk.j
36 matches
Mail list logo
