Stream v. SeqView

Question

What are use cases to use SeqView over a Stream?

scala> List(1,2).view
res34: scala.collection.SeqView[Int,List[Int]] = SeqView(...)

scala> List(1,2).view.toStream
res33: scala.collection.immutable.Stream[Int] = Stream(1, ?)

Perhaps if you need to access the middle of a Stream and it's costly to access Stream elements, then you'd use the SeqView?

This is nearly a duplicate of this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5159000/stream-vs-views-vs-iterators — wheaties, Dec 23 '13 at 16:38
Also see: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4798043/what-is-the-difference-between-the-methods-iterator-and-view and http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3361478/what-are-views-for-collections-and-when-would-you-want-to-use-them — wheaties, Dec 23 '13 at 16:40
View is broken, don't use it. [Point.](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/scala-language/uRt7Nvj3o6k/ufiCOr47aDAJ) — kiritsuku, Dec 23 '13 at 16:41
@Kevin Meredith Nah, this question and the answer do give a nice, concise response to what you proposed. — wheaties, Dec 23 '13 at 16:42

score 2 · Accepted Answer · answered Dec 23 '13 at 16:37

2

SeqView is not cheaper than Stream. In fact, it's more costly to access an element in SeqView than Stream, because Stream caches the results it computed but SeqView(or any other Views) not.

answered Dec 23 '13 at 16:37

Lai Yu-Hsuan

27,509
28
97
164

Stream v. SeqView

1 Answers1