Primitive streams and optional (original) (raw)

Tim Peierls tim at peierls.net
Sun Nov 25 10:02:54 PST 2012

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

This would be more appealing with OptionalXxx, moving the Supplier

argument away from the stream and onto the Optional object itself:

return s.least().or(() -> computeDefaultValue()); sorry, but why do you want to create an Optional if there is no option. When you provide a supplier, if there is no result, the supplier is called to provide one so at the end there is always a value. I like intermediary state in a builder only when necessary.

When I use "Optional" I mean specifically the Guava semantics. I think it's worth the extra object creation to be able to simplify the stream API.

I understand that Doug and others disagree violently with me. :-)

Optional is interesting only if it's a pseudo class recognized by the

language that let you call any methods you want on it, i.e. if Optional acts as a reified null object. We are far from that.

Straw man argument.

--tim

More information about the lambda-libs-spec-observers mailing list