[harladsinsteden]

I don't know what to make of this list...

Very strange reasoning and even stranger results: Streams 1/10?! Lambdas (maybe the biggest enhancement ever) a mere 4/10?!

Sorry, but this is just bogus.

[tofflos]

I will make any excuse to use Streams but understand the negativity. They are difficult to debug and I feel the support for parallelism complicated, and in some cases even crippled, the API for many common use cases.

[nunobrito]

I'm that author. It has been more than a decade and still won't use streams nor lambdas. Makes the code too difficult to write and debug for me.

Really prefer to have more lines of code and understanding very clearly what each one is doing, than convoluting too many instructions on a single line.

[harladsinsteden]

For me it's the opposite: If I had to write the code that I usually use lambdas for in any other way then _that_ would be very difficult to write and to debug.

Especially when writing JavaFX code which is full of callbacks and event handlers I really don't see any other (useful) option.

Can lambdas be misused? Of course they can - but so can every other code construct.

[samus]

I bet you don't like how it looks when you put huge code blocks inside a lambda. Me neither. But that's an issue with coding style; it forces you to extract processing code into a method. I'd argue the opposite way - imperative syntax constructs make spaghetti code too easy to work with.

[foresterre]

They're a bit verbose, the interfaces are slightly convoluted and some basic operations are missing from the standard library.

It's also a little convoluted to work with different types of data.

For this one, I wish they would have taken a bit more inspiration from other languages and spent the time to make it more readable.

That said, I generally like streams a lot, and they do reduce the amount of branching, and having less possible code execution points makes testing easier too.