No 'fold left' without a combiner ?
brian.goetz at oracle.com
Tue Sep 10 18:53:15 PDT 2013
>> Adding a handful of sequential-only operations may make certain use
>> cases easier, but there's a hidden cost -- reasoning about stream
>> pipelines becomes harder for everyone, because now parallel
>> compatibility becomes an element of the model which must be
>> considered. Short-term gain, long-term pain. No thank you!
> so for my example, the idea is to *not* use a stream and use a for loop
> instead, right ?
The idea is to do what feels like natural code. We've not outlawed the
for-loop. There will be places, obviously only in sequential cases,
where for-loops are simpler, easier, faster, or more natural. Whether
to use a loop or a stream pipeline depends on how much else the stream
could just as easily be a for-loop, and at that point, its a
pick-your-poison thing at this point (the imperative for loop or the
streamy reduce that makes you specify an extra argument.) But if you
going back to a loop would be giving up a lot.
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-observers