Java 8: preferred way to count iterations of a lambda?

I face the same problem often. I need to count the runs of a lambda for use outside the lambda.

E.g.:

myStream.stream().filter(...).forEach(item -> { ... ; runCount++});
System.out.println("The lambda ran " + runCount + "times");

The issue is that runCount needs to be final, so it cannot be an int. It cannot be an Integer because that's immutable. I could make it class level variable (i.e. a field) but I'll only need it in this block of code.

I know there are various ways, I'm just curious what is your preferred solution for this?
Do you use an AtomicInteger or an array reference or some other way?

Solution 1:

Let me reformat your example a bit for the sake of discussion:

long runCount = 0L;
myStream.stream()
    .filter(...)
    .forEach(item -> { 
        foo();
        bar();
        runCount++; // doesn't work
    });
System.out.println("The lambda ran " + runCount + " times");

If you really need to increment a counter from within a lambda, the typical way to do so is to make the counter an AtomicInteger or AtomicLong and then call one of the increment methods on it.

You could use a single-element int or long array, but that would have race conditions if the stream is run in parallel.

But notice that the stream ends in forEach, which means that there is no return value. You could change the forEach to a peek, which passes the items through, and then count them:

long runCount = myStream.stream()
    .filter(...)
    .peek(item -> { 
        foo();
        bar();
    })
    .count();
System.out.println("The lambda ran " + runCount + " times");

This is somewhat better, but still a bit odd. The reason is that forEach and peek can only do their work via side effects. The emerging functional style of Java 8 is to avoid side effects. We did a little of that by extracting the increment of the counter into a count operation on the stream. Other typical side effects are adding items to collections. Usually these can be replaced via use of collectors. But without knowing what actual work you're trying to do, I can't suggest anything more specific.

Solution 2:

As an alternative to sync hassling AtomicInteger one could use an integer array instead. As long as the reference to the array does not get another array assigned (and that's the point) it can be used as a final variable while the values of the fields can change arbitrarily.

    int[] iarr = {0}; // final not neccessary here if no other array is assigned
    stringList.forEach(item -> {
            iarr[0]++;
            // iarr = {1}; Error if iarr gets other array assigned
    });