Change repeatN to support n=0 #3492
Merged
+4
−4
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ybasket
reviewed
Oct 11, 2024
Comment on lines
2579
to
2580
| else if (n == 0) Stream.empty | ||
| else this |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As we know from the require, the only case not covered in the if(n > 0) is exactly 0, so maybe simplify to
Suggested change
| else if (n == 0) Stream.empty | |
| else this | |
| else Stream.empty |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh yes, absolutely! I'll amend my commit
This combinator now works equivalently to repeat.take(n)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While putting together a couple of simple Stream example, I was surprised that
repeatN(0)fails with an error instead of completing with an empty Stream. I would have expected it to work asrepeat.take(0)would do.I'm opening this PR to get some feedback about this proposal. I'm happy to discuss possible consequences of this change.
Apart from avoiding surprises or confusion on the user side, I don't have any real use cases in mind where this would be necessary to have