Why does Stream<T> not implement Iterable<T>?

To convert a Stream to an Iterable, you can do

Stream<X> stream = null;
Iterable<X> iterable = stream::iterator

To pass a Stream to a method that expects Iterable,

void foo(Iterable<X> iterable)

simply

foo(stream::iterator) 

however it probably looks funny; it might be better to be a little bit more explicit

foo( (Iterable<X>)stream::iterator );

You can use a Stream in a for loop as follows:

Stream<T> stream = ...;

for (T x : (Iterable<T>) stream::iterator) {
    ...
}

(Run this snippet here)

(This uses a Java 8 functional interface cast.)

(This is covered in some of the comments above (e.g. Aleksandr Dubinsky), but I wanted to pull it out into an answer to make it more visible.)

I would like to point out that StreamEx does implement Iterable (and Stream), as well as a host of other immensely awesome functionality missing from Stream.

kennytm described why it's unsafe to treat a Stream as an Iterable, and Zhong Yu offered a workaround that permits using a Stream as in Iterable, albeit in an unsafe manner. It's possible to get the best of both worlds: a reusable Iterable from a Stream that meets all the guarantees made by the Iterable specification.

Note: SomeType is not a type parameter here--you need to replace it with a proper type (e.g., String) or resort to reflection

Stream<SomeType> stream = ...;
Iterable<SomeType> iterable = stream.collect(toList()):

There is one major disadvantage:

The benefits of lazy iteration will be lost. If you planned to immediately iterate over all values in the current thread, any overhead will be negligible. However, if you planned to iterate only partially or in a different thread, this immediate and complete iteration could have unintended consequences.

The big advantage, of course, is that you can reuse the Iterable, whereas (Iterable<SomeType>) stream::iterator would only permit a single use. If the receiving code will be iterating over the collection multiple times, this is not only necessary, but likely beneficial to performance.

Stream does not implement Iterable. The general understanding of Iterable is anything that can be iterated upon, often again and again. Stream may not be replayable.

The only workaround that I can think of, where an iterable based on a stream is replayable too, is to re-create the stream. I am using a Supplier below to create a new instance of stream, everytime a new iterator is created.

    Supplier<Stream<Integer>> streamSupplier = () -> Stream.of(10);
    Iterable<Integer> iterable = () -> streamSupplier.get().iterator();
    for(int i : iterable) {
        System.out.println(i);
    }
    // Can iterate again
    for(int i : iterable) {
        System.out.println(i);
    }

If you don't mind using third party libraries cyclops-react defines a Stream that implements both Stream and Iterable and is replayable too (solving the problem kennytm described).

 Stream<String> stream = ReactiveSeq.of("hello","world")
                                    .map(s->"prefix-"+s);

or :-

 Iterable<String> stream = ReactiveSeq.of("hello","world")
                                      .map(s->"prefix-"+s);

 stream.forEach(System.out::println);
 stream.forEach(System.out::println);

[Disclosure I am the lead developer of cyclops-react]

Not perfect, but will work:

iterable = stream.collect(Collectors.toList());

Not perfect because it will fetch all items from the stream and put them into that List, which is not exactly what Iterable and Stream are about. They are supposed to be lazy.

You can iterate over all files in a folder using Stream<Path> like this:

Path path = Paths.get("...");
Stream<Path> files = Files.list(path);

for (Iterator<Path> it = files.iterator(); it.hasNext(); )
{
    Object file = it.next();

    // ...
}