<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">This would be more easily done than new syntax, surely.</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></blockquote></div>… and it wouldn't increase the size of the language, so in general, I prefer library-solutions.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I'd expect some pushback against the conformance, but my personal opinion is that the difference between an empty collection and a missing collection doesn't matter most of the time.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Performance doesn't matter most of the time as well ;-), but imho it's a big plus if the most elegant solution is the fastest, too (and I have no idea if or when the compiler infrastructure is clever enough to recognise empty loops without instantiating useless objects).</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">But afaics, there is some consensus that Optional<Sequence> deserves some sugar applied to it — either in the language, or in the stdlib.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>