Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Can I put a filter into a lambda?
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 09:29:11 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <p03m3p$ihc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <321ee28f-bbea-4565-a48e-c0476d9a78d4@googlegroups.com> <ovshh6$8q1$1@dont-email.me> <a7f8b0f0-79cb-4f83-bf77-2ce7d94a2a19@googlegroups.com> <p03i39$n76$1@dont-email.me> <9545f24b-39da-4eab-8c65-365a299b3b2a@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 14:29:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e61e15c5e7400baf9d7d8a7d2cc0d6e3"; logging-data="18988"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18tXJvQ8xELj2aWKM/xXD0i"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0
In-Reply-To: <9545f24b-39da-4eab-8c65-365a299b3b2a@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rZYvbrFUo7PtVJxlfgmip1MF/eo=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:37716

On 12/4/2017 8:32 AM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> On Monday, December 4, 2017 at 8:20:59 AM UTC-5, Eric Sosman wrote:
>>       If it *must* be an ArrayList (and not some other kind of List),
>> you might want to change the last bit to
>>
>> 	.collect(Collectors.toCollection(ArrayList::new));
>>
>> Although the toList() method appears to use ArrayList anyhow, it
>> doesn't guarantee to do so -- meaning that it might use some other
>> List in a future Java, or in circumstances I haven't studies (e.g.,
>> it might behave differently with a parallel stream).
>>
> ok, thanks, I'll keep that in mind.  I'll have to test if the variable can be assigned and if that would be more efficient.  Currently it doesn't matter what kind of list because I made the rowToModelIndex variable final, just calling clear() then addAll().

     If you'd rather clear and repopulate the same List (as opposed
to making a new one each time), you could use forEach():

	rowModelIndex.clear();
	IntStream.range(0, modelRowCount)
             .filter((value) -> include(value))
	    .forEach((value) -> rowModelIndex.add(value);

or

	rowModelIndex.clear();
	IntStream.range(0, modelRowCount)
	    .forEach((value) ->
	        if (include(value)) rowModelIndex.add(value));

I don't know which of these might be faster, or whether either
might be faster than a plain old `for' loop.  (Research project.)

     FWIW, Brian Goetz (who knows far more about JVM performance
issues than I ever will) indicates that object allocation and
collection is cheaper than commonly thought, so there's little
if any advantage to re-using the same List object:

https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275/index.html

... which means even more research may be indicated.  (The cited
article is twelve years old, and we may expect that JVM's have
continued to improve meanwhile).

-- 
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
Eleven hundred forty-three days to go.