Consumers and Suppliers (original) (raw)

Brian Goetz brian.goetz at oracle.com
Fri Apr 5 06:21:39 PDT 2013

Also, this request is kind of letting the tail (the way methods happening to be named in one particular collection implementation) wag the dog (names for function types.)

The java.util.function types are for naming functions. A queue is not a function.

On 4/5/2013 9:17 AM, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:

I'm with David on this one. It's not that a queue is both at same time, but rather it's neither - it's just a handoff/communication channel between producers/consumers.

I'd say a queue can be a message sink (receives) and message source (returns), but supplier/consumer is too close of a name to what people typically think of in that case, and it's not the queue. My $.02 Thanks Sent from my phone I didn't mean that the collection was typically simultaneously a Consumer and a Supplier, I meant that it was typically one or the other (I should have been clearer in what I said). In my own collection library I do this and I find it very convenient. Sent from my iPad On 05/04/2013, at 12:54 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:

On 5/04/2013 9:51 AM, Howard Lovatt wrote: If the method in Consumer was called put and the method in Supplier was called take, then Queue could be retrofitted to extend both Consumer and Supplier and then many collections could be Consumers and Suppliers.

I think this would be useful - what do others think? I would find that rather confusing because in the common producer/consumer sense the producer puts things into the queue and the consumer removes them from the queue. The queue itself is not considered to be producer/supplier nor consumer. David -- Howard.

More information about the lambda-dev mailing list