FlatMapper (original) (raw)

Raab, Donald Donald.Raab at gs.com
Tue Feb 12 10:52:54 PST 2013

Are we going to have a consistency issue with FlatMapper vs. Function? For instance we have ToIntFunction, but not ToIntFlatMapper. Instead we have FlatMapper.ToInt.

-----Original Message----- From: lambda-libs-spec-experts-bounces at openjdk.java.net [mailto:lambda-_ _libs-spec-experts-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Brian Goetz Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:42 PM To: lambda-libs-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net Subject: FlatMapper

Here's where things have currently landed with FlatMapper -- this is a type in java.util.stream, with nested specializations. Full bikeshed season is now open. Are we OK with the name explodeInto()? Is this general enough to join the ranks of Function and Supplier as top- level types in java.util.function? @FunctionalInterface public interface FlatMapper<T, U> { void explodeInto(T element, Consumer sink); @FunctionalInterface interface ToInt { void explodeInto(T element, IntConsumer sink); } @FunctionalInterface interface ToLong { void explodeInto(T element, LongConsumer sink); } @FunctionalInterface interface ToDouble { void explodeInto(T element, DoubleConsumer sink); } @FunctionalInterface interface OfIntToInt { void explodeInto(int element, IntConsumer sink); } @FunctionalInterface interface OfLongToLong { void explodeInto(long element, LongConsumer sink); } @FunctionalInterface interface OfDoubleToDouble { void explodeInto(double element, DoubleConsumer sink); } }

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