Stream concatenation sugestion
boaznahum at gmail.com
Tue Apr 2 06:31:34 PDT 2013
I want to join the request.
I already have the need to implenet it by myself.
I would to add
* public static <T> Stream<T> concat(Stream<? extends T> ...
Because the decision:
return (a.isParallel() || b.isParallel())
is sometimes just wrong. Two streams can be 'sequential' but processed in
[Of course one always do concat(s1,s2).parallel() ]
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Jose <jgetino at telefonica.net> wrote:
> Please, consider allowing varag argument in stream concatenation
> Stream<T> concat(Stream<? extends T> ...streams)
> It would save repetitive code in some cases.
More information about the lambda-dev