What about forking? 2018-06-19 13:42 GMT-03:00 Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com>:
> Gosh, this is a tricky one to name. > > collectingTo seems the best so far, although collect(collectingTo(…)) ... > > One last suggestion from me, “expanding”, as in the collector expands the > number of collectors the input elements are applied to. > > Paul. > > > > > On Jun 19, 2018, at 7:47 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.go...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > It is "distributing" in the same sense as the distributive law: > > > > c*(a+b) = c*a + c*b > > > > (Think of the two collectors as the "sum" of a collector, and > "distributing" says that you can send the elements to the sum by sending > all of the elements to each.) > > > > That said, I agree that the less mathematically-inclined might be drawn > to the plain-english meaning, which is more like an (imprecise) bisection. > > > > On 6/19/2018 10:14 AM, Zheka Kozlov wrote: > >> I don't like `distributing` for the same reason as `bisecting`: for me, > it sounds like a Stream is giving each collector only a part of elements. > >> > >> 2018-06-19 19:44 GMT+07:00 Brian Goetz <brian.go...@oracle.com <mailto: > brian.go...@oracle.com>>: > >> > >> > >> > >> collectingToBoth > >> > >> > >> This one is actually both evocative of what the method does, and > >> in the spirit of the existing naming conventions (collectingAndThen.) > >> > >> An n-ary version could just be called `collectingTo`, where it is > >> passed a varargs of Collector. Could we get away with > >> collectingTo for a binary version as well? The existence of the > >> "combiner" function might make that a stretch, but I prefer > >> `collectingTo` to `collectingToBoth`. > >> > >> > >> (I still like `distributing` too.) > >> > >> > > > >
