A modern programming language that makes developers happier.

kotlinlang

is there a practical difference between these two ways of converting a `java.util.Stream` to a `Flow`?  would the first generally be the preferred way (or is there another, more idiomatic way?):
```
result.iterator().asFlow().onCompletion { result.close() }
```
vs
```
flow {
    result.use {
        for (edge in it) {
            emit(edge)
        }
    }
}
```

I would create a feature request for kotlinx.coroutines to add Stream.asFlow()

Second looks better for me

:thumbsup: Please do. PR would be also welcome (should be added `kotlinx-coroutines-jdk8` module).

The only design problem that I see is that a `Stream` is single-use, while Flow is multi-use. In the similar case of converting a channel to a flow we’ve picked a different name for conversion method (`consumeAsFlow`) to highlight the fact that the resulting `Flow` is special — it can be consumed just one. In fact, it must be consumed exactly once.

Same with streams. Some streams might be backed by open resources (see `Files` streams) and must be used in order to get the underlying resources closed.

<https://github.com/Kotlin/kotlinx.coroutines/issues/1601> :+1: