On 05/01/2012 01:37 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On May 1, 2012, at 12:53 PM, Rémi Forax wrote:
On 04/30/2012 11:03 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Apr 28, 2012, at 1:01 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
Hi Jim,
Yes, I've basically try to submit a patch each time I've written a
method join
in one of my application :)
The funny think (in fact it's even not funny) is that I think that
this methods
should not be in String anymore. In Java 8, we will have defender
methods
so you can write join directly on an Iterable. And there is some
discussion
to also allow defender methods on arrays too,
so we may can write a method join on Object[] too
(on an interface inherited from Object[] to be precise).
I really think that list.join(",") is better than "".join(",",
list) and
["foo", "bar"].join(",") is better than "".join(",", ["foo", "bar"]).
but maybe I'm wrong.
Good point. Although i don't see the harm with such methods on
String that defer, or are required if say defender methods on arrays
never come about.
There are also more general cases of interpose and interleave (see
Clojure's functions as an example) since join can be implemented
using interpose which can be implemented using interleave.
Implementing interpose with interleave requires to remove the last
element,
which is not so easy in lazy mode. It's easier to implement it directly.
Or the first e.g.:
http://clojuredocs.org/clojure_core/clojure.core/interpose
(defn interpose
"Returns a lazy seq of the elements of coll separated by sep"
{:added "1.0"
:static true}
[sep coll] (drop 1 (interleave (repeat sep) coll)))
yes, it's better !
Not saying join should be implemented that way (not so optimal for
Strings only) but i think such functions are very useful. I am not
tracking the lambda library work very closely, have such functions
been considered?
Yes, we discuss about zip/unzip, and what we call BiStream.
unzip is the other name of interleave.
Would that require the creation of an intermediate object that holds
two values?
or reuse Map.Entry.
That are the two reasonable choices.
Paul, I think this discussion should be moved to lambda-dev.
It will be more fruitful.
Paul.
cheers,
Rémi
