mappedTo -> join? (original) (raw)

Tim Peierls tim at peierls.net
Tue Jan 8 10:19:06 PST 2013

• Previous message: mappedTo -> join?
• Next message: mappedTo -> join?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

toMap works for me.

join is already too overloaded.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

On 01/08/2013 06:12 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:

One of the reducers we've got takes a Stream and a function T->U and creates a Map<T,U>. Currently we call this "mappedTo". Should this be called "join" instead? Or mapJoin?

Map<Person, Integer> map = people.reduce(mappedTo(Person:**:getAge))); vs Map<Person, Integer> map = people.reduce(join(Person::**getAge))); Map<Person, Integer> map = people.reduce(mapJoin(Person::**getAge))); or just toMap, Map<Person, Integer> map = people.reduce(Reducer.toMap(** Person::getAge))); Rémi

• Previous message: mappedTo -> join?
• Next message: mappedTo -> join?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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