On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:05:10 GMT, Rémi Forax <fo...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> @forax but this would not be a view: changes in the underlying collection >> won't be reflected > > Yes, > The spec says :"Changes to the underlying collection might or might not be > visible in this reversed view, depending upon the implementation." so i > believe the default implementation i proposed is a valid implementation In the JEP, it says: > Any modifications to the original collection are visible in the view. If we don't have an efficient reversed view, I don't see a point of declaring a collection sequenced; same reason for declaring a sequenced/deque vs. a full-on list with inefficient list random access operations. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/7387#discussion_r1152474419
