It think this alternative is not given fair comparison. 1st this is an
instance method, so the foreach loop should read:
for (T t : stream.asIterable()) {
...
}
Let's keep sight of the goal here, which is: people find it a gap that
Stream does not play cleanly with foreach. And the main knock against
this approach (besides the chorus of "that's not what we wanted" we are
sure to get) is that it is not really much more discoverable than some
of the other workarounds (such as casting stream::iterator to Iterable.)
And now for something more controversial...
Is changing the language really out of the picture here?
Yes. This issue was extensively litigated during JSR-335, and it was
decided that one language-to-library tunnel (Iterable) here was all we
wanted. And there's been no new evidence since then that we want to
change the language for this.
There's a reason it took as long as it did for Stuart to come up with
this proposal; all the options were known for years, they all have
problems, and the net benefit is still relatively narrow, which means we
don't have a lot of budget before the cost-benefit becomes negative. I
think the option proposed is the least-worst, and people still seem to
really want to be able to foreach over streams.
