Hello all, After reading through Brian Goetz's "Effect cases on Switch" (specifically, the "Other switch tricks" section), I have decided to not implement this feature after all. The fact is, switch expressions, especially with "when-clauses", does a better job of clarifying intent than this feature does. Sure, there is slightly more verbosity, but the intent of this feature was never to minimize the character count, it was to increase clarity. And as is, switch expressions with when clauses accomplish that better.
Here is a link to the subsection of the abovementioned article -- https://inside.java/2023/12/15/switch-case-effect/#other-switch-tricks Could someone help me close this on JBS? Or should it just not be closed at all? Here is a link to the JBS -- https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319802 Thank you for your time and help! David Alayachew On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 1:19 AM David Alayachew <davidalayac...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, I will also add a specialized version of this method to > java.util.function.UnaryOperator. That is because UnaryOperator is a > subinterface of Function. Function goes T -> R, but UnaryOperator just goes > T -> T. We do not want UnaryOperator to have the T -> R static function > included due to inheritance, so it will get its own version that has the > same method name and parameters, but the type parameters will be different. > > Here is another mockup - this time for UnaryOperator2's version of the > same method. > > > interface UnaryOperator2<T> extends Function2<T,T>, UnaryOperator<T> > > { > > > > public static <T> UnaryOperator2<T> ternaryApply > > ( > > Predicate<? super T> test, > > Function<? super T, ? extends T> trueFunction, > > Function<? super T, ? extends T> falseFunction > > ) > > { > > > > return > > (T input) -> > > test.test(input) > > ? trueFunction.apply(input) > > : falseFunction.apply(input) > > ; > > > > } > > > > } > > On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 12:12 AM David Alayachew <davidalayac...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> It has been a month since I sent this proposal. Since no one has told me >> that this is a terrible idea, I will submit this as an enhancement to JBS, >> and once the ticket is made, start work on creating a pull request. >> >> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 3:13 AM David Alayachew <davidalayac...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Whoops, bad import. >>> >>> Please replace the following line with the one after it. >>> >>> > import java.util.function.Function; >>> >>> > import java.util.function.*; >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 3:09 AM David Alayachew <davidalayac...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> I have an idea that I want to run by you all -- a new method on >>>> java.util.function.Function to capture ternary operations. >>>> >>>> Here is a mockup of what I wanted to do. >>>> >>>> > >>>> > import java.util.function.Function; >>>> > >>>> > @FunctionalInterface >>>> > public interface Function2<I, O> extends Function<I, O> >>>> > { >>>> > >>>> > public static <I, O> Function<I, O> ternary >>>> > ( >>>> > Predicate<I> test, >>>> > Function<I, O> trueOutput, >>>> > Function<I, O> falseOutput >>>> > ) >>>> > { >>>> > >>>> > return >>>> > (I input) -> >>>> > test.test(input) >>>> > ? trueOutput.apply(input) >>>> > : falseOutput.apply(input) >>>> > ; >>>> > >>>> > } >>>> > >>>> > } >>>> > >>>> >>>> I think this is useful for a few reasons. >>>> >>>> * This composes, just like the ternary operator itself. >>>> >>>> * It pairs well with Function.identity() and method references to >>>> clearly (but concisely) communicate intent. >>>> >>>> * Ternary operations are common, so this will find great use by >>>> developers of all sorts. >>>> >>>> There is at least one part I don't quite like about this design - what >>>> if one (or both!) of your outputs is not a functional transformation of the >>>> input? >>>> >>>> For example, String username = id.isBlank() ? "UNKNOWN" : lookup(id); >>>> >>>> Obviously, this is easy to work around - simply ignore the input of the >>>> function. But you lose clarity and simplicity that way. I would put a note >>>> in the javadoc that says that this method should only be used in instances >>>> where both outputs are a functional transformation of the input. That way, >>>> intent is clarified. But if we go that route, maybe this function should >>>> get a better name to capture that? testThenApply? ternaryTransform? >>>> ternaryApply? >>>> >>>> Thank you for your time and help! >>>> David Alayachew >>>> >>>
