Function type naming conventions (original) (raw)

Tim Peierls tim at peierls.net
Tue Jan 29 09:30:12 PST 2013

That's a good start. (Typo in lambda signature after Supplier.)

Still some holes, e.g., doesn't tell me which of the following is right:

ObjObjToIntFunction BiToIntFunction ToIntBiFunction

--tim

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Paul Sandoz <paul.sandoz at oracle.com>wrote:

On Jan 29, 2013, at 5:48 PM, Kevin Bourrillion <kevinb at google.com> wrote: Does anyone have a complete and current taxonomy of where exactly we've ended up with all this (leaving out all the history of how we got here)?

Does the following suffice? http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/file/5d4167b7bf8c/src/share/classes/java/util/function/package-info.java Paul.

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Tim Peierls <tim at peierls.net> wrote: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Joe Bowbeer <joe.bowbeer at gmail.com>wrote: +1 ObjIntBlock (or a more descriptive "Block" name if one is selected) Agreed. Works well in conjunction with Dan Smith's suggestion ('if the base type is parameterized in both its parameters and return, then the "To" prefix is mandatory. If not, "To" is not used.'), omitting To and Bi where they aren't needed. --tim

-- Kevin Bourrillion | Java Librarian | Google, Inc. | kevinb at google.com

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