By this below definition(pre 1.8) of Iterable,
package java.lang;
import java.util.Iterator;
public interface Iterable<T> {
Iterator<T> iterator();
}
I would say that, Iterable is dependent on Iterator interface as shown below,
package java.util;
public interface Iterator<E> {
boolean hasNext();
E next();
default void remove() {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("remove");
}
}
Standard recommendation is that, any implementation that implements Iterable interface becomes iterable.
But syntactically, MyClasscan implement interface Iterator and enable the implementation MyClass as iterable without explicitly mentioning class MyClass **implements Iterable**{}, by adding Iterator<T> iterator(); behavior in Iterator interface instead of Iterable interface. This would have simplified presenting only one interface(Iterator). Iterator can hold all the responsibilities that Iterable does.
So, What is the rational behind adding Iterator<T> iterator(); behavior in Iterable(redundant) interface instead of Iterator interface?
I am not clear with the purpose of introducing Iterable interface.
Please help me understand.
For me, this is not a duplicate question because this is an answer which talks about violation of SRP.
