On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:43 PM, Henry Jen <henry....@oracle.com> wrote: > >> So if possible we should report ORDERED and state the association, if any, >> of encounter order with the order declared in the central directory, which i >> hope is, and seems to be, the same. (Plus update the docs of entries() too.) >> > > I agree with you entries() and streams() should be in sync on ordering. > Spec-wise, I have no clear preference.
> But when I looked into a zip file archive, I always would like to see entries > in alphabetic order so I can find the files I really care, which will also > have directory structure nicely. Order in central directory not necessary > helping me. > When you do the following what entry do you think should be returned? zipfile.entries().nextElement(); zipfile.stream().findFirst(); zipfile.stream().parallel().findFirst(); I would expect all entries to be equal and to be the first entry in the central directory. I would not expect the latter to be non-deterministic [*]. Or what about the following: List l = new ArrayList(); Enumeration e = zip file.entries(); for(int i = 0; i < 10 & e.hasMoreElements(); i++) l.add(e.nextElement()); List ss = zipfile.entries().limit(10).collect(toList()); List sp = zipfile.entries().parallel().limit(10).collect(toList()); Should those lists be equal? Again i would expect so. There does appear to be a well-defined encounter order. I don't think most developers will consider the collection of zip entries to behave like a Set. It is more list-like. Paul. [*] Note that our current implementation is deterministic, but that is because we don't currently check when doing a find first if the stream has no order and then defer to find any, which is a minor optimization we can enable.
