Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #38833

Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder()

Show all headers | View raw

On 2019-03-29 18:47, Eric Sosman wrote:
> 
> Having come this far, and following the principle that one might as
> well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb, we arrive at:
> 
>    public static int[] MergePurgeAndReverseSort_3(
>          Integer[] values1, Integer[] values2, boolean reverse) {
>       return Stream.concat(
>                Arrays.asList(values1).stream(),
>                Arrays.asList(values2).stream())
>             .filter((value) -> value != null)
>             .distinct()
>             .sorted(reverse ? Collections.reverseOrder() :
> Integer::compare)
>             .mapToInt(Integer::intValue)
>             .toArray();
>    }
> 
> ... and proudly announce "It's a one-liner!"  (The APL fans, of course,
> sneer at us.)
> 
>     So: No big deal, just lots of ways to acquire cats' skins.

While we're on the matter of taste, I would also have used:
> .filter(Objects::nonNull)
instead of
> .filter((value) -> value != null)

-- 
DF.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Graeme Geldenhuys <graemeg@example.net> - 2019-03-29 15:01 +0000
  Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2019-03-29 11:19 -0400
    Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Graeme Geldenhuys <graemeg@example.net> - 2019-03-29 16:42 +0000
      Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2019-03-29 13:47 -0400
        Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2019-03-29 13:53 -0400
        Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2019-03-29 19:42 +0100
  Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Graeme Geldenhuys <graemeg@example.net> - 2019-03-29 16:53 +0000
    Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 10:19 -0700
    Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2019-03-30 11:23 +0200
      Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Graeme Geldenhuys <graemeg@example.net> - 2019-03-30 11:16 +0000
  Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 13:20 -0700
    Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Graeme Geldenhuys <graemeg@example.net> - 2019-03-30 11:21 +0000
      Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2019-04-01 04:56 -0700
  Re: Interview question - better solution for MergePurgeAndReverseOrder() bursejan@gmail.com - 2019-03-29 15:40 -0700

csiph-web