Re: IntStream.sum (original) (raw)

Remi Forax forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Jan 16 07:53:58 PST 2013

My argument is when you reduce over integers, you want an integer as result, like int + int is an int.

Reducing over integers and get a long should not be the default behavior because it's not what people espect.

If someone want a long, using reduce is better because reduce require to pass an operator so user can choose the exact semantics he want, throwing an exception or using a BigInteger is perhaps better.

Rémi

Sent from my Phone

----- Reply message ----- From: "Paul Sandoz" <paul.sandoz at oracle.com> To: Cc: <lambda-libs-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net> Subject: IntStream.sum Date: Wed, Jan 16, 2013 14:53

On Jan 16, 2013, at 2:33 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

On 01/16/2013 02:32 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:

On Jan 16, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

And long can hold the result of MAXINT additions?

stream are sized is store in a long if a size if definite or can be infinite so it solves nothing. I don't quite understand the above sentence. Are you suggesting reducing/folding on a infinite stream? yes, and you throw an exception when you've done, Brian talk about that.

Well don't reduce/fold on a infinite stream :-)

I don't really buy into your argument that because there might be streams of size > Integer.MAX_VALUE that it implies sum() solves nothing, seems a rather extreme position to take. Do you think sum() solves nothing regardless of whether it returns an int or long?

Paul.

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