I don't know if it's been proposed before, but I think any implementation
would necessarily be inefficient.
I imagine such an iterator would need to produce objects of type Pair.
This would lead to a lot of allocation and could create garbage collection
pressure. The same functionality can be achie
I think this is a useful addition, but I wonder if these new APIs are
misnamed: StopWatch::test doesn't actually test, nor does StopWatch::accept
consume. Instead, these all wrap lambdas in a timed version of the same
type. (There's probably some lambda calculus terminology for this.)
I'd propose
I agree with Gary. If an object is exposing sensitive data in its
toString() then the problem should be fixed at the source.
Peter
On Tue, Sep 3, 2024, 11:04 AM Gary D. Gregory wrote:
> I appreciate the intent but this feels like bad solution. If a toString()
> method return a password, then t
This feels like it might have been more useful pre-Java 8. Why not use a
lamda function, which would permit arbitrary string transformations?
/peter
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, 7:42 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:27 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> > On 22 February 2018 at 23:15, Gary Gregory
This could be solved if it were possible to force javac to generate bridge
methods. There's an extension which would allow that here:
https://github.com/infradna/bridge-method-injector, but I suspect it would
complicate the build process quite a bit.
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:48 PM sebb wrote:
>
That sounds similar to java.io.Writer. Maybe this should be a HelpWriter?
On Wed, Sep 25, 2024, 7:11 PM Claude Warren wrote:
> Actually the Producer constructor takes an "Appendable" as an argument and
> then provides methods like
>
> printPara("Some text here")
>
> Which would output a paragrap
My vote (which everyone is free to ignore) is still for HelpWriter. It's
simple and intuitive, and it's consistent with the names of the methods the
interface declares (e.g. writePara, writeTable). I
find SemanticAppendableDecorator too verbose and I have no intuition for
what it means.
Peter
On
:13 AM Elliotte Rusty Harold
wrote:
> Thanks. In that case I'm -1 on this since it is not available in Java
> 8, and even in Java 9 is only possible, not necessarily implemented.
>
> We can revisit in a few years if the JDK has moved on by then.
>
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 1:0
y Harold
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 2:00 PM Peter Burka wrote:
> >
> > Before Java 9, javac always generated StringBuilder calls for string
> > concatenation (or StringBuffer prior to Java 2). Using + is less verbose,
> > generates the same code, is more re
I presume this is referring to
https://openjdk.org/jeps/280 (JEP 280: Indify String Concatenation) which
was implemented in Java 9.
On Sat, Dec 14, 2024, 6:26 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold
wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 3:08 PM Serw wrote:
>
> > Would the community support using string concatenat
10 matches
Mail list logo
