scala.xml is notoriously badly-designed and will likely be removed or replaced (I could be out of date and it might already have been rewritten). Daniel Spiewak's antixml appears to be the de facto standard. Don't take it as typical Scala.
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:15 PM, clay <claytonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > In hg changeset 6331:af4b2dd992d6 (build 62), Optional.map was removed from > the Lambda code. So they are moving in the opposite direction. Now there are > three important missing features: map, flatMap, and iteration. > > Regarding Dick Wall's comments on episode #397 > > - Option's main advantage is not avoiding NPE's, but factoring common > null-related conditional logic out of all your code and into a standard > library component. > > See JDK author Brian Goetz explain the rationale for adding Optional with a > simple Java snippet here: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/lambda-dev/2012-September/005952.html > > - Java's for loop is completely adequate for Option/Optional. Java doesn't > need for-comprehensions or for-yield or pattern matching for a complete > Optional. > > - Scala's API does use null rather than Option in a few places. Scala.xml > for one. I vaguely remember seeing other places, but I can't recall exactly > where right now. Even without a green field implementation like Haskell, > having a good Optional type is still valuable even in a mixed null/Optional > environment. > > On Tuesday, October 23, 2012 7:22:54 PM UTC-5, clay wrote: >> >> Has anyone seen java.util.Optional in the new Lambda builds? >> >> Why is there no flatMap? >> >> Why does it not support iteration (can't do a for loop over an Optional)? >> >> Why doesn't it have Some/None subclasses? >> >> Why does Scala and Functional Java get this right yet Guava and now the >> core Java guys completely ruin it? >> >> Why doesn't Java 8 have persistent immutable collections? >> >> >> Some of the JDK developers have real talent, but this is completely >> amateur. >> >> I really hope they can fix this before it is set in stone. Tons of decent >> functional programmers can write a complete Option implementation easily as >> a fun exercise. It boggles my mind that they don't have the decent talent >> working on something so important. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Java Posse" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/FIwskPnhYj0J. > > To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
