Comparator/Comparators API change proposal
paul.sandoz at oracle.com
Tue Jun 4 02:22:26 PDT 2013
On Jun 4, 2013, at 3:13 AM, Henry Jen <henry.jen at oracle.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:07 PM, Michael Hixson <michael.hixson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Henry,
>> 1. Does this code throw an NPE? It's not clear from the docs.
>> int result = Comparators
>> .compare(null, null);
> It should return 0; otherwise, it's a bug.
>> 2. How did you decide which static methods should live on Comparator
>> versus Comparators?
> Good question, it can be confusing.
> The (compromised) idea is that commonly-use constructor-like factory method will be in Comparator; Otherwise, in Comparators. Anything take a Comparator to return a comparator(i.e. combinator) should be in Comparators with the exception of comparing(Function, Comparator).
> I would like to hear if there are better suggestions.
It feels to me a somewhat artificial distinction, given that naturalOrder is present on Comparator but naturalOrderKeys is not.
I would be inclined to have all the static methods on Comparator and if required make Comparators package private for providing supporting artifacts.
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-observers